Guarp
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by Guarp on Jun 9, 2004 4:15:57 GMT -5
With the G8 summit coming up, anti-globalization protests also picked up. Their main issue is the ever increasing power of big multinationals, who are exceeding nation-borders and generate often more money then single-state-economies. Is this a threat to our societies or is this what capitalism is all about?
Noreena Hertz, a Cambridge professor, published a book on this issue under the title "the silent takeover - global capitalism and the death of democracy".
We can vote for our governments, but does that really matter when one company decides to outsource 1000s of jobs to a cheap country by the decision of one CEO??
Do you feel democracy is still alive or have we become dependent on corporations without realizing it?
|
|
|
Post by HA on Jun 9, 2004 5:59:38 GMT -5
Things are a bit more complicated than that. The CEO decides because of the financial gains he will be able to ensure for the shareholders of the company. Now these shareholders are either big companies themselves (usually representing insurances and pension funds) or big banks and financial institutions (usually representing investment organisations). In both cases and excluding individuals who profit at a personal level (Georges Soros is a good example) most of the other companies have shareholders and the final result is reaped by them - most probably people like you and me who either put their money to the bank, or paid their social security and pension fund contributions, or decided to buy a mutual fund or stocks and bonds at the Stock Exchange. So in certain way we also vote, albeit indirectly the above mentioned CEO.
Now it is up to us to decide - and have it reflected in the political party and the politicians we vote for - if we want more control over this process or not. To my knowledge no political party in Europe has this issue on the agenda - at least not in a professional way. And as long as Europe is governed by bureaucrats who - like the above mentioned CEO - are influenced by the capitalistic free market principles I do not think this will change.
|
|
|
Post by HA on Jun 9, 2004 8:30:39 GMT -5
As for the notion of democracy one has to clarify that the first democracy, the Athenian, was not one. Voting rights were held only by those who paid taxes and equipped the army (i.e. a minority) - not by all people living in Athens, even if they were free men i.e not slaves (e.g the meteques).
So the notion of democracy is closely related to the definition of «demos» - if the «demos» is a (dominant) minority then we cannot speak of democracy in the way we all understand the word.
|
|
|
Post by HA on Jun 9, 2004 8:43:34 GMT -5
So instead of democracy we should use the term participative government where everybody has the right and the obligation to participate, even if (s)he is not an expert (in ancient Athens, all posts were attributed by ballot draw and lasted for one day - the Athenians made only one exception so that Miltiades could serve as General for two days and so he defeated the Persians in Marathon. Can you imagine Ministers and all other high officials of the State chosen by ballot and serving for only one day? This meant of course that everybody had to be actively informed about the affairs of the State because he may become official the next day. People who did not participate in the management of the common affairs - i.e. lead a private life (idiotiki zoi) - were «idiots». How many «idiots» will abstain from the upcoming European elections in the Netherlands ? In Europe as a whole maybe more than 50% !!! So as an answer to your question «Who is actually governing us?» I would say either organised dominant (mostly economic) minorities and «idiots» (through their abstension). Now somobody said «I can deal with nasty people but not with idiots» or something like this. Rather hopeless no !!!
|
|
|
Post by HA on Jun 9, 2004 8:46:48 GMT -5
Corrected version
... lead a private life (i d i o t i k i zoi) - were «i d i o t-s». How many «i d i o t s» will abstain from the upcoming European elections in the Netherlands ? In Europe as a whole maybe more than 50% !!!
So as an answer to your question «Who is actually governing us?» I would say either organised dominant (mostly economic) minorities and «i d i o t-s» (through their abstension). Now somobody said «I can deal with nasty people but not with i d i o t-s » or something like this.
|
|
Guarp
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by Guarp on Jun 11, 2004 16:25:14 GMT -5
So as an answer to your question «Who is actually governing us?» I would say either organised dominant (mostly economic) minorities and «i d i o t s» (through their abstension). Now somobody said «I can deal with nasty people but not with i d i o t s » or something like this. Interesting what you told about democracy, ha. I see your point, and that's actually the main reason I don't like a referenda for political decisions. If a government is reflecting the attitude of the people who voted for them, I feel they should get the freedom to make their decisions. (even though I don't always agree with the majority) A referendum tends to put these complex choices in a yes or a no, and most of the time the result is far from satisfying. In the beginning of my thread I was also pointing at a lack of democracy, caused by the increasing power of companies. I think the way presidential candidates are financed in the States is a good example of that, even though the rules have been made thighter. When a donation is made one expect something in return for it. By accepting money from these companies, politicians are more likely to favor the interests of these companies, instead of the interests of the people who they are actually representing: the ones who used their democratic right.
|
|