“Is” Over “Ism”

There are only two systems of government, one where the leaders care about the people, and one where they do not. ‘Isms’ are secondary to “Is”. Cuba is lambasted as a “communist dictatorship” a “tyranny” where the people have no “human rights”. Yet, when a hurricane threatens, a quarter of a million people are moved from the projected path by that ‘evil’ government.

America is hailed as a “democracy” as the “upholder of human rights”, but when a hurricane threatens New Orleans, little is done and nearly two thousand people die. With billions of dollars of greenbacks to spend, America can’t be bothered to move people from New Orleans. Can’t be bothered to build houses for them. Stuffed into trailers which have unacceptable levels of formaldehyde is the best that can be done.

A poor nation, with embargoes on almost everything, Cuba can send thousands of buses, move a quarter of a million people over a hundred miles to reside in decent shelters, until they can be returned and assisted in rebuilding. “Isms” mean nothing, deal with what “Is”. Where would you like to be in case of disaster?

In a country that does nothing or in one where everything is done to preserve life? Democracy is an acquired taste. It requires an educated, intelligent and interested population. A population which is not simply focused on events which effect them today, but those which have future significance.

In societies where the majority is not highly intelligent nor well educated, or particularly interested, no system is more unjust than democracy. People will vote against their future for transient satisfaction. Democracy developed over thousands of years. First with a rather exclusive selection of voters. Then, incremental extensions.

It took the United States about one hundred and ninety years to extend voting rights from white property owning males to black property-less females. But that is how democracy works. Ever increasing circles.

In nations which have no history of democracy to suddenly dump such a system full blown results in the tyranny of the mob. “Give us Barabbas” was the choice of the mob.

In putrescent systems there are elections and the ruling party wins. This legitimizes tyranny by suggesting the people agreed to it. Robert Mugabe was elected. Now, he can not be unelected.

The Cayman Islands is a colony of Great Britain, and demands to remain so. It has seen the dangers of independence and democracy in it’s Caribbean neighbors, and appreciates that small countries which do not have strong federal strictures result in kakistocracies.

What is being seen in Iraq today is mirrored in other nations around the world. Some, as Afghanistan, where the “tribal” loyalties are obvious, others, like Jamaica, where tribal behaviour is hidden behind a veneer to emerge at election time.

In small nations, direct democracy, sans political parties would serve well. Political Parties only breed dissension, creating an “us” and “them.” Without Parties there would not be a ratbag of party hacks who have to “get” something, but persons elected on the basis of merit who would have to form allegiances for the efficient running of the nation.

This is, of course, shunned, because major powers, like America, can not control such a government of the people, for the people and by the people. Everyone would need to be bribed, not just a handful.

It is always easy to gain control over a weaker people by getting them to elect their own oppressor. Before becoming fascinated by ‘isms’ check what ‘is’.