History does not repeat itself but is full of lessons and clues for those who would see them. Fascism is not new but is creeping up around the world. History tells us that its characteristic ruthlessness, lies and populism make it difficult to oppose, especially for weakly-led, consensual systems such as prevail currently in this and other hitherto democratic countries.
Governing in a democracy is not easy nor especially well paid. Why do candidates step forward? We may shortly be offered one or more candidates to become Prime Minister in place of Keir Starmer. We certainly need the best leader we can find but by what criteria?
Fame is not enough, certainly. Are those being touted chosen because they will be best for us stakeholders; because of party politics; or for personal ambition? Office holders may be tempted into office with ambitions for power for their own self-esteem or by temptation to overstep the rules of democracy.
Democracy’s checks and balances
They generally operate in plain sight, via public and institutional support, until they achieve control over levers which allow them to implement their agendas – or those of their hyper-rich paymasters who lie beyond the reach of democracy’s checks and balances, even controlling the very media which should call them to account. It is already too late to prevent mass media ownership falling into anti-democratic hands at that stage.
The period prior to an aspirant gaining power still provides those who would protect their democracy with chances. The very first essential is constant vigilance: to recognise the potential risk; to see the signs that an aspirant aspires; to establish their motives and prejudices and compare these with their potential role.
We have a right to be sceptical after the chapters of Johnson and Truss and the recent form of Reform UK councillors. For evidence of the risk of inaction, look no further than a US President awarding himself immunity from accountability for almost anything. It is easier to counter risks before laws have been changed or rights lost.
Indicative behaviours which should trigger defensive reaction may include:
- Corruption: soliciting or accepting funds from undemocratic sources with expectations of influence over policy;
- Entryism: concentrating resources to normalise the party’s presence in elections and authorities;
- Executive impunity: authorising regulations or immunities without parliamentary scrutiny;
- Discrimination: demonising one subset of society to create a common enemy within, sometimes while favouring another;
- Negligence: failure to vet candidates for public office for competence, character and motive;
- Platforming; allowing unwarranted media attention asymmetrically;
- Political militia; engaging force answerable to the populist against demonised subsets of society.
By the time all of these have been noticed, the aspirant is a long way up the ladder towards autocracy. For this reason, the second rule for the defence of democracy must be transparency. Any of these behaviours by the aspirant must be exposed to parliament, the justice system and to the electorate, as evidence of the threat to their rights. Action must be taken as appropriate by those whose duty it is to protect democracy, be this via discipline, via the courts or by outcry.
Democracy may already be eroding
Nor does this vigilance need to await a populist demagogue. Lowly councillors can lubricate the way for national figures, normalising their party in the eyes of the electorate. Who are the people named on ballot papers? How can it be right that candidates for public office come to the ballot with affiliations unknown to the voters? How can ministers and party leaders accept cash from unaccountable donors maybe with an overtly divisive agenda? To ask these questions is to warn that the defences of democracy may already be in the process of erosion.
There are ways to obstruct such assaults on our rights. Parliament still has the means to:
- cap the funds available for elections at all levels, with a powerful regulator; and ban or restrict donations from overseas sources and their representatives.
- mandate vetting and full disclosure of interests at all levels of government, including social media evidence.
- actively challenge and apply the law on discrimination equally to all and without political bias, wherever it is found;
- adopt fair voting so that all voters enjoy representation. not just a chosen few.
- use independent, evidence-driven media sources to hear and tell the truth.
Doing much less than this may lead our and other liberal democracies into the hands of ruthless, racist authoritarians, as history suggests.
CLICK HERE TO DONATE TO OUR CROWDFUNDER
HELP US BECOME STRONGER SO THAT WE CAN CONTINUE TO DELIVER POWERFUL CITIZEN JOURNALISM!
