Is Australian democracy at risk from an authoritarian leader?
Continued from Authoritarianism is taking over the world. Will it snare Australia?
To recap, in Part 1 I wrote that:
In recent years, we have witnessed three individual politicians who have used the techniques of the authoritarian leader, fear, negativity, misinformation and lies. I refer to Tony Abbott, Scott Morrison and the now opposition leader Peter Dutton. All have used the methods of an authoritarian ruler.
The best way to guard against a takeover by a popular authoritarian is to create the best democracy possible.
Democracy is a complex political system that involves various components. Still, at its core, it is about individuals with similar beliefs and values collaborating to create a set of principles that guide their actions and decisions. It is a process that requires active participation and engagement from all members of the community, with a focus on inclusivity and equality. Democracy is a mechanism for achieving consensus and promoting the common good through dialogue, debate, and compromise.
They then become the foundation of political parties. These ideologies pull in different directions in a quest for majority approval by the people. It is a far from perfect system that has variations all around the world. It is elastically flexible, unpredictable and, at its worst, violent and highly combative.
The system of Australian Democracy, when it functions optimally, is characterised by a sense of dignity and constructive engagement. It effectively serves society’s needs and can accommodate a broad range of ideas and perspectives, regardless of their extreme. However, it is worth noting that the Australian democratic system is not perfect; it is far from ideal.
What’s wrong with our Democracy?
In their article The Global Expansion of Authoritarian Rule, Sarah Repucci and Amy Slipowitz contend that:
“Undemocratic leaders and their supporters in democratic environments have worked to reshape or manipulate political systems, in part by playing on voters’ fears of change in their way of life and by highlighting the very real failures of their predecessors. They have promoted the idea that, once in power, their responsibility is only to their own demographic or partisan base, disregarding other interests and segments of society and warping the institutions in their care so as to prolong their rule. Along the way, the democratic principles of pluralism, equality, and accountability – as well as basic stewardship and public service – have been lost, endangering the rights and well-being of all residents.”
In fact, it can sometimes be cumbersome and unwieldy, and there have been instances where it has failed to meet the expectations of its constituents. Despite its imperfections, the Australian democratic system remains an important and valuable institution that plays a critical role in shaping the nation’s future.
Common to most Western Democracies (without anything better), it has a capitalistic economic system. One that is badly in need of an overhaul.
In Australia, the right to vote is the gift that democracy gives. People are free to vote for whichever party (or individual) they support, but overriding this is the fact that people cannot possibly believe in democracy if, at the same time, they think their party is the only one that should ever win.
A clear indication of an Australian democracy in decline is that people are giving up this voting gift, literally saying: “A pox on both your houses”.
The 2022 election had the lowest turnout for a century:
“For the first time since compulsory voting was introduced for the 1925 federal election, turnout fell below 90%.”
Our political system is in crisis because our solicitations need to speak with clarity on issues that concern people, particularly women.
I would argue that an enlightened democracy should give the people a sense of purposeful participation. It should forever be open to regular improvement in its methodology and implementation. Its constitutional framework should be exposed to periodical revision, renewal, compromise, and bipartisanship when the common good cries out.
But above all, its function should be that regardless of ideology, the common good should be served first and foremost. A typical good, healthy democracy serves the collective from the ground up rather than a top-down democracy that exists to serve secular interests.
Every facet of society, including the democratic process, needs constant and thoughtful renewal and change. Otherwise, we become so trapped in the longevity of sameness that we never see better ways of doing things.
Unfortunately, Australia’s version of the democratic process has none inherent in it and is currently sinking into a quagmire of American Tea Party hypotheses.
I am not a political scientist, historian or a trained journalist. I write this as a disgruntled and concerned citizen because it seems that the Australian democracy I grew up with no longer exists.
The demise of Australian democracy originates in a monumental shift by both major parties to the right, with the result that neither seems to know exactly what they stand for.
They are now tainted with sameness.
The Liberal Party has been replaced by neo-conservatism, authoritarian leadership.
Labor has lost its zeal for change and how to go about it.
We have ended up with an individual identity against a collective one, and old-style Liberalism no longer has a voice. There is little or no difference between the Liberals and the National Party, who seem irrelevant as a political force. Conservatives have gone down the path of inequality with a born-to-rule mentality that favours the rich.
They still carry the “lifters” and “leaners” tags so popular with the Abbott era.
“It is a distillation of the idea that there is no such thing as society, that we are only responsible for our own circumstances”. (Tim Dunlop, The Drum, 4/7/2014).
Labor seems unable to walk over the shadow of its past, a time when it did great things to advance the nation.
The Labor Party needs to rid its party of outdated objectives and invest in a social, philosophical common good. And recognise that the elimination of growing inequality is a worthwhile pursuit.
To do nothing is to allow the authoritarian his or her way. I don’t wish to sound alarmist, but…
In recent years, we have witnessed three individual politicians who have used the techniques of the authoritarian leader, fear, negativity, misinformation and lies. I refer to Tony Abbott, Scott Morrison and the now opposition leader Peter Dutton. All have used the methods of an authoritarian ruler.
Next week: Ideas for change.
My thought for the day
We dislike and resist change in the foolish assumption that we can make permanent that which makes us feel secure. Yet change is, in fact, part of the very fabric of our existence.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
13 comments
Login here Register here-
Henry
-
Terence Mills
-
Gus
-
Phil Pryor
-
wam
-
Harry Lime
-
-
andyfiftysix
-
GL
-
corvusboreus
-
GL
-
Zathras
-
Andyfiftysix
Return to home pageJohn, I appreciate your optimism but the only democracy I see played out is in a sandpit I don’t have access to, ie the exclusive LNP, Labor & Greens inner sanctum pit. And by ‘democracy’, read ‘de-mob’ rule. Our votes basically count for nothing. We are not the mob that rules, we don’t even count. Honest Ads satire team is on it – filmsforaction.org/watch/honest-government-ad-whistleblower-protection-laws/
The Liberals have tried a new ploy in the Dunkley by-election by outsourcing their misinformation to an external contractor – in this case a dubious organisation known as Advance, it used to be Advance Australia but then they recognised that they are not actually interested in advancing Australia, just the Liberal Party. A bit like FOX News who used to have a slogan ‘Fair and Balanced’ but that got up Rupert’s nose so they dropped it.
Advance will come out with the most outrageous statements and the Liberal party will just say. well it’s them not us – I wouldn’t be surprised if they were taking an Orwellian approach with their slogans :
In Spud we Trust
War is peace.
Free beer for all (Chardonnay for the Ladies !)
Freedom is slavery.
Spud is our Future
Ignorance is strength
We’ll see how well they go today !
Henry said it all for me.
A huge humanoid bedpan of brimming brown droppings, a Dutton, is hardly a figure of any optimism. Dutton’s deficient intellectual capacity remains clear, and he can barely function outside of the role, the directors, the scripting, the idealised heroic inflated bullshit of the star. As a human, a citizen, a positive thinking contributor, Dutton is barely a suburbanite mediocrity, incapable of contributing genuine useful, personal original offerings, He is such a repulsive inflated confection that one gags and chokes at the thought of such a lower form being pumped up at unsupportable levels. He isn’t much, isn’t good enough. The Australian conservative following includes thousands of professionals alone, with tertiary trained types, experienced, qualified, prudent, capable of assessing and judging, To have such a deficient loudmouth is beyond embarrassing, below minimal standards, an insult to the intelligence. Democracy is a vision, a “myth”, mirage, dream, hope. How is it now, actually?
Albo will do me but I wish he was not rejected by torpid and billyboy.
plus ça change, plus c’est la même (Karr) Glad to see you want the politics that you remember as truth, when growing up? you were: 20s with menzies when the democratic catholic poor and the commo fearing immigrants kept the protestant rich in power? 30s with Whitlam 40/50s with Hawke 50/60s with the lying rodent and retirement age for the lemon ps are you dabbling in thatcher???
pps
wonder how dutton will do today???
What Phil Pryor said,and lets not forget the deputy,bobcat mouth,flea brain.Dishonorable mention to ‘well done Angus’, who wouldn’t know the truth if it smacked him in the gob.What’s left of the former ‘liberal’ party is full of dickheads who can only aspire to mediocrity.Fat chance.
Pingback: Is Australian democracy at risk from an authoritarian leader? - independent news and commentary Australia
All i read is that democracy is at a cross road.
Democracy is in rapid decline. idealism has given way to power at any cost.
Decision making makes no sense when put against ambitions, ie fraudband, robodebt , housing and super. Its so incredibly partisan that good ideas are rejected yet dumb shit is hailed as reform. Just look at the Libs new nuclear policy, it makes no financial sense at all. And they claim to be superior financial managers.
There are too many incentives to grab power, just like a dog that chases the wheel. No incentives to improve our lot.
What we need are fixed terms and a demonetising of seats. The hardest thing to overcome would be how to stop narcisists from getting in in the first place. One man one vote is a poisoned chalice. If you think democracy is the best of all bad decisions, your mind is rather narrow.
Holy shit! Annabelle has gone full on foaming at the the mouth and ripping the carpet with her fangs rabid. Not taking the loss very well is she.
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2024/mar/02/dunkley-byelection-live-count-result-labor-liberals-coalition-face-critical-test
I reckon the basic constitutional model of Australian democracy is fairly sound (comparatively speaking), with more sturdy safeguards against dictatorial ambition than examples like the US (where POTUS executive powers echo right of kingship) or Israel (single house parliament), let alone a totalitarian shithole like Russia under Putin.
However, being amongst the least-worst global examples should not be an excuse for lazy complacency, either from vigilance against authority creep or from aspiring for practical improvements.
The main functional flaws I see, both in terms of parliamentarians ignoring the desires of their constituents, and dangers of ‘authoritarian creep’, lie in the current dominance of party duopoly, which operates akin to corporate cartels.
Coles or Woolworths, Coke or Pepsi, Labor or Coalition.
I choose to eschew such brands, thus broadening my choices.
Locally sourced markets, regionally produced beverages, reasonable small party/indi candidates.
I live in a federal electorate that has generationally voted National (traditional safe seat). Last election Cowper almost flipped for the first time in it’s history, due to enthusiastic and effective campaigning by an intelligent and articulate independent candidate who engaged with the electorate at ground level.
This reflects a broader national trend, where seats traditionally held by major parties are falling to grassroot campaigning by popular independents.
The practical effect is we now have people like Zali Steggel proposing legislative amendments like ‘truth in political advertising’ and ‘sobriety within parliament’, measures to protect the general population by increasing the transparent accountability of those who purport to represent us.
That such proposals, seen by the population as basic common sense, are encountering outraged resistance from the old political brands is an indicator of how effectively the traditional LIB/LAB party arrangement has been in deflecting and diluting the clear wishes of the majority.
Redland is under attack from a disgusting, vile and repulsive creature:
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2024/mar/03/queensland-redland-city-council-election-andrew-laming
The world seems to be drifting toward right-wing authoritarianism with little resistance and for women at least the USA is becoming more like the Taliban and cares little about electing a malignant criminal narcissist as leader.
Government is now “by the Corporations, for the Corporations” and democracy is in decline where money ultimately buys votes. An American commentator once observed that in Australia you can’t see where the Coal Industry ends and the Government starts.
As for our own democracy, each State has 12 Senators, except the Territories who have two each. That means NSW with a population of around 9 million has the same representation as Tasmania who have around 600,000 residents. That means a Tasmanian vote is worth more than one in NSW.
However the 500,000 citizens in the ACT only have 2 Senators.
Apparently this is to give minorities more influence.
Odd? Certainly not equitable.
How we all forget. When Howard had control of the senate, he rammed through work choices.
What if tony Abbott or Morrison had control of both houses? Mandate would have been called and all sorts of inhuman policies would have been trotted out. A legalised take over. Only the weasel words remain.