Original post by Old Man
What is global democracy? I suppose a number of people will have a number of ideas as to what it means. To me it means that every country in the world will have the government in place which is created by the election of members of parliament to service various areas of the country, such members of parliament being any person over the age of 18 years without any criminal record.
The definition of democracy in Chambers 20th Century Dictionary is a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people collectively, and is administered by them or by officers appointed by them the common people: a state of society characterised by the recognition of equality our rights and privileges, political, social and legal equality. There are quite a large number of democracies operating in this world but I suggest far more countries are ruled by a non‑democratic government. If one goes back 200 years one will find there probably has never been a democracy up to that time and it was only when the monarchs of various countries had their power reduced by having their property taken away or themselves beheaded did democracy begin to rise. We now have a situation where democracies exist in the world today but not nearly enough as there are more governments in which a dictator or a small group of people control the affairs of the country and everyone that lives in it. In my view it is essential that we endeavour to create a democracy in every country in the world. By so doing I believe the expectation of war between countries is likely to diminish to a very large extent. If one looks back one will see that rules are usually propagated by dictators who take their country to war whether the people like it or not. Of course there are always a cabal who support the dictator doing so, but there must be millions of people who are afraid to speak out against it and have to put up with the consequences as can be seen from the results of the first and second World Wars in the 20th century.
The reason for the wars have been the desire by certain persons to obtain power over various territories in the world however not just the ones they might live in but those which are neighbours of theirs or even further afield. Why should any country believe that it has the right to take the assets and land of another country? Admittedly there have been wars and discussions about the rights of countries from time to time immemorial but isn’t it time to stop and think of our families and particularly the mothers and children who as a general rule don’t really want to be involved in killing other people or being killed themselves.
I suggest there needs to be a total stop at this stage of all divisions of countries if countries are in argument about what land is theirs and what is not. After all who wants to own another country unless they see this as a method of getting ill‑gotten gains and becoming very rich? Having said all that, how do we go about starting truly democratic world?
When I talk of global democracy I am not talking about one single organisation democratically elected governing the whole world. That would be impractical. Aside from the fact persons on one side of the world cannot understand the local affairs of those on another, it would be impossible to bring all countries together as one under one government because of the various currencies having such variations as their value and the various countries having such wide variations to the value of their own assets and benefits. I believe instead that every country as it now stands with the borders as they are now ought be fixed for ever, such boundaries having been recognized by the United Nations, and each should have its own parliament made up of their elected representatives of the various areas of their own country. As need representation and the Government be created from those representatives. In many countries, it is highly likely that the boundaries of the electorates within them will remain the same, and the real requirement will be for the election of members of that country’s Parliament to be conducted in what one might call a proper manner or the usual democratic manner.
Accordingly each country would continue as it does today but without the prospect of being able to wage war on anybody else or to have a government which is not democratically elected. The deaths of innocent people let alone the deaths of innocent soldiers in the last two World Wars is enough to make one think life is of no value to the world at all and particularly to the individual family who have to take such an action to take someone else’s country.
One of the problems that one can foresee is that the various countries with a dictator at its head and various other powerful people within the country supporting the dictator not wishing to give up their way of life and their perks etc for the sake of creating a democracy.
The United Nations should be empowered to provide the scrutiny that might be required in some places to certify whether or not election has been properly held, and to exert such pressure as is reasonably required to make it happen.
The excuse for not doing so on the grounds that there is a religious difference must be ignored.
Every religious person should be entitled to follow his own beliefs but none of them should have the right to interfere with the beliefs of others. It does not matter about the religious difference because many of us are happy with our own religion so why should others be concerned? Our only concern is when those who take a certain type of religion and endeavour to force it upon the rest of the populous. This leads to anarchy and everything that is not required for a global democracy.
Religious intolerance of individuals within the boundaries of a country may still have to be dealt with by that country to which they belong, not to the countries outside of those to which they belong, but this should occur in the context of a democracy whose electoral process has been overseen by the United Nations.
Hopefully a large number of the members of parliament elected by the people will be women. Women are the nurturers of mankind and how many do you know who are glad to see their sons marched off to war and never come back? As far as the western world is concerned in general terms the female population is treated in the same way as the male population when it comes to appointment as a member of Parliament. The fact that not as many women are elected as men is among other things that women’s role in the community is a nurturing one and it does not take them in to the realms of running businesses as much as a man in a role which is more a business and commercial role and providing for his family. Nevertheless there is nothing to stop either sex from being appointed as the representative of the people in their country’s parliament. In fact if we are to avoid a third world war and a global democracy is designed to assist in this the chances are that women governing the country would not put up with it. It is unlikely that they would seek to go to war and see their sons and daughters as well as their husbands killed by bombs and bullets and anything else that might come their way. Accordingly the predominance of women may well be the case in respect of the democracies of the world.
As I said before in writing of Global Democracy I am not talking of a single Parliament running the whole world. I believe that would be quite impractical, but that it would not be impractical for us to encourage every country in the world however slowly it may be to gradually endorse a system of election of a Government which is fair to every member of its own population.
Original post by Old Man