Problems With Liberal Democracy

GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
The 'Problems with Republicans' thread has taken on a life of it's own and maybe we should look at the bigger picture. First, a definition of liberal democracy. It is not the 'libtard, loony left' that some think it is.

Liberal democracy - Wikipedia
Liberal democracy is the combination of a liberal political ideology that operates under an indirect democratic form of government. It is characterized by elections between multiple distinct political parties, a separation of powers into different branches of government, the rule of law in everyday life as part of an open society, a market economy with private property, and the equal protection of human rights, civil rights, civil liberties and political freedoms for all people. To define the system in practice, liberal democracies often draw upon a constitution, either codified (such as in the United States)[1] or uncodified (such as in the United Kingdom), to delineate the powers of government and enshrine the social contract. After a period of expansion in the second half of the 20th century, liberal democracy became a prevalent political system in the world.[2]
Liberal democracy probably has the widest left/right range on the political spectrum, straddling the centre. I think I sit right on that centre line. In some areas I may lean left, in others to the right. But, I don't tend to stray very far from the centre - the "mushy middle" if you will. I have voted for all three of Canada's main political parties in different elections over the last forty years. I have also spoiled my ballot when I've been unhappy with all parties/candidates, but I always vote.

I believe in civil rights and civil responsibilities. Sure, I like freedom as much as the next person. I also recognize that enjoying that freedom comes with some moral obligations. I will never cheat on my taxes. I want my society to look after the less fortunate and that shouldn't be left to charity. I want us to respect each other's rights. Sometimes those rights conflict and that's where liberal democracy gets messy. It will never be perfect and we need to be comfortable with that ambiguity. A bit of empathy goes a long way.

The promises of the doctrinaire left and right are utterly empty. When they appeal to our most base instincts, we must resist the urge to submit to them. A classic example is Brexit. Everything will be wonderful, its proponents said. The reality is an utter poop pageant.

Over the past few years - and the last two or three in particular - I have become more and more alarmed at the health of liberal democracy in, for lack of a better term, the "western world". Francis Fukuyama was clearly wrong when he wrote "The End Of History". In it, he predicted that after the end of the Cold War, the collapse of Communism in eastern Europe, opening up of trade with China, the future would be assured for liberal democracy being the default form of government. That has clearly not been the case.

These are just a few of my thoughts - disordered and incomplete as they may be. I just thought it would be an interesting topic to discuss.
 
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Warlord
The 'Problems with Republicans' thread has taken on a life of it's own and maybe we should look at the bigger picture. First, a definition of liberal democracy. It is not the 'libtard, loony left' that some think it is.
Thank you for writing all this out! I completely agree with you.
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Spartan
Here's an interesting turn of events. A hard right part in Sweden - yes, Sweden - has captured 20% of the vote in a recent election.

Sweden’s Far Right Just Made History. Is It the Country’s Future? - The New York Times (nytimes.com)
So very sadly, this is the case, and that party Sweden Democrats has founders that were neo-Nazi wich the current ones more or less kick them out. There was a recent NYT op-ed giving some history about the party and founding, and I'll look it up and post it here.
 
Last edited:
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
The 'Problems with Republicans' thread has taken on a life of it's own and maybe we should look at the bigger picture. First, a definition of liberal democracy. It is not the 'libtard, loony left' that some think it is.

Liberal democracy - Wikipedia


Liberal democracy probably has the widest left/right range on the political spectrum, straddling the centre. I think I sit right on that centre line. In some areas I may lean left, in others to the right. But, I don't tend to stray very far from the centre - the "mushy middle" if you will. I have voted for all three of Canada's main political parties in different elections over the last forty years. I have also spoiled my ballot when I've been unhappy with all parties/candidates, but I always vote.

I believe in civil rights and civil responsibilities. Sure, I like freedom as much as the next person. I also recognize that enjoying that freedom comes with some moral obligations. I will never cheat on my taxes. I want my society to look after the less fortunate and that shouldn't be left to charity. I want us to respect each other's rights. Sometimes those rights conflict and that's where liberal democracy gets messy. It will never be perfect and we need to be comfortable with that ambiguity. A bit of empathy goes a long way.

The promises of the doctrinaire left and right are utterly empty. When they appeal to our most base instincts, we must resist the urge to submit to them. A classic example is Brexit. Everything will be wonderful, its proponents said. The reality is an utter poop pageant.

Over the past few years - and the last two or three in particular - I have become more and more alarmed at the health of liberal democracy in, for lack of a better term, the "western world". Francis Fukuyama was clearly wrong when he wrote "The End Of History". In it, he predicted that after the end of the Cold War, the collapse of Communism in eastern Europe, opening up of trade with China, the future would be assured for liberal democracy being the default form of government. That has clearly not been the case.

These are just a few of my thoughts - disordered and incomplete as they may be. I just thought it would be an interesting topic to discuss.
The Wiki article of Classic Liberalism contains "Classical liberalism is a political tradition and a branch of liberalism that advocates free market and laissez-faire economics; civil liberties under the rule of law with especial emphasis on individual autonomy, limited government, economic freedom, political freedom and freedom of speech."

Far cry from what we're seeing now.
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Spartan
So very sadly, this is the case, and that party Sweden Democrats has founders that were neo-Nazi wich the current ones more or less kick them out. There was a recent NYT op-ed giving some history about the party and founding, and I'll look it up and post it here.
Here is the article https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/20/opinion/sweden-democrats-elections.html where the author is Elizabeth Åsbrink, a Swedish author.

Living in Sweden I think she is spot on, but I think that Sweden has not properly made up for it's action and inaction during WWW II, as well as the decade before.

>>>STOCKHOLM — “Helg seger.”

Those two words, spoken by Rebecka Fallenkvist, a 27-year-old media figure and politician from the Sweden Democrats, the far-right party that took 20 percent in Sweden’s general election last week, sent shivers down spines throughout the country. It’s not the phrase, which is odd and means “weekend victory.” It’s the sound: one letter away from “Hell seger,” the Swedish translation of the Nazi salute “Sieg Heil,” and the war cry of Swedish Nazis for decades.

Ms. Fallenkvist was quick to disavow any Nazi associations. She meant to declare the weekend a victorious one, she said, but the words came out in the wrong order. Perhaps that’s true. But the statement would be entirely in keeping with the party Ms. Fallenkvist represents, which, after a steady rise, is now likely to play a major role in the next government.

For Sweden, a country that trades on being a bastion of social democracy, tolerance and fairness, it’s a shock. But perhaps it shouldn’t be. Steadily rising for the past decade, the Swedish far right has profited from the country’s growing inequalities, fostering an obsession with crime and an antipathy to migrants. Its advance marks the end of Swedish exceptionalism, the idea that the country stood out both morally and materially.
There’s no doubt about the party’s Nazi origins. The Sweden Democrats was created in 1988 out of a neo-Nazi group called B.S.S., or Keep Sweden Swedish, and of the party’s 30 founding fathers, 18 had Nazi affiliations, according to a historian and former party member, Tony Gustaffson. Some of the founding fathers had even served in Hitler’s Waffen SS.

Step by step the party changed its image — in 1995 uniforms were forbidden — but the core ideology remained: Immigrants should be persuaded to go home, Swedish culture should be protected and neither Jews nor the Indigenous Sami people were to be considered “real Swedes.” Not even the soccer star Zlatan Ibrahimovic secured the party’s approval, although he was born in the country and is the national team’s record goal scorer. The stances of the current leadership, which has sought to sanitize the party’s reputation, are equally worrying.
Take Linus Bylund, the party’s chief of staff in the Swedish Parliament. In an interview in 2020, he declared that journalists for the national public service radio and television ought to be “punished” if their reporting was biased. Such people, he stated previously, would be “enemies of the nation.” Proximity to power hasn’t softened his views. The day after the recent election, a reporter asked him what he now looked forward to. “Journalist-rugby,” he replied.

Jimmie Akesson, the party’s leader, also surprised a television audience in mid-February when he refused to choose between Joe Biden and Vladimir Putin. It’s of a piece with the party’s accommodating stance on Russia: The Swedish Parliament was so concerned about a journalist who used to work in the party’s office and had contact with Russian intelligence that it denied the journalist accreditation. Add in a cohort of representatives more prosecuted for crimes than any other, organized troll campaigns against opponents and even attempts to undermine faith in the electoral system, and you have the image of a deeply unsavory party.

Even so, the Sweden Democrats’ rise is an impressive right-wing success story. The party entered the Parliament in 2010 with just over 5 percent of the vote — but, under the leadership of Mr. Akesson, it built an efficient, nationwide organization. It more than doubled its share of the vote in 2014 and, after Sweden admitted over 160,000 Syrian refugees, grew even more in the 2018 election. But it’s in this vote that Sweden Democrats secured a sought-after breakthrough with a stunning 20.6 percent of the votes, surpassing the conservative Moderaterna, which had been Sweden’s second biggest party for over 40 years. Now only the Social Democratic Party, Sweden’s historic party of government, has more support.

This monumental rise is thanks to the dramatic changes in Swedish life over the past three decades. Once one of the most economically equal countries in the world, Sweden has seen the privatization of hospitals, schools and care homes, leading to a notable rise in inequality and a sense of profound loss. The idea of Sweden as a land of equal opportunity, safe from the plagues of extreme left and extreme right, is gone. This obscure collective feeling was waiting for a political response — and the Sweden Democrats have been the most successful in providing it. It was better in the good old days, they say, and people believe them. Back to red cottages and apple trees, to law and order, to women being women and men being men.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/21/style/modern-love-young-gay-and-single-among-the-nuns-and-widows.html?action=click&algo=identity&block=editors_picks_recirc&fellback=false&imp_id=843828264&impression_id=8655fbe0-5157-11ed-b76e-f10cb70c6bd4&index=0&pgtype=Article&pool=editors-picks-ls®ion=ccolumn&req_id=230060338&surface=home-featured&variant=0_identity
For opening this door, the major parties have themselves to blame. Bit by bit, the traditional parties have adopted the point of view and rhetoric on crime and immigrations of the Sweden Democrats Party — but this strategy hasn’t won back any votes. On the contrary, it seems to have helped the far right. In a little more than 12 years, Sweden Democrats has managed to compete with the Social Democrats for working-class voters, with Moderaterna for the support of entrepreneurs and with the Centre Party among the rural population.

The media is culpable, too. In an attempt to protect traditional Swedish democratic values, the mainstream media has often shunned and canceled Sweden Democrats officials and supporters, especially in the party’s early years. But now it seems that this response actually might have had the opposite effect. Individuals leaning toward the Sweden Democrats for various reasons have felt stigmatized: Some haven’t been invited to family gatherings, and in a few cases have even lost their jobs. This has not only fed the party’s self-image as a martyr but also nurtured even more loyalty among its supporters.

One could argue that the traditional parties have had their part in creating the perfect storm. The Social Democratic Party has named the Sweden Democrats their main enemy in the election campaign, making other alternatives almost invisible in the public debate. Us or them, was the strategy. Many, predominantly male Swedes, chose the Sweden Democrats. As for a conservative party like Moderaterna, they have seen their voters abandon them for Sweden Democrats, and so Moderaterna reacted by emphasizing the similarities between the two parties until it reached a point where it became hard to distinguish any differences at all.

The result is now plain to see. The Social Democrats, though the largest party, are unable to form a government. Instead, a conservative bloc, led by Ulf Kristersson from Moderaterna, will attempt to take office — as long as it has the support of the Sweden Democrats. Effectively a kingmaker, the party is now one of the most successful far-right parties in Europe since World War II.

It’s a terrifying truth. But we must bear in mind that the majority of the country’s population is not among the Sweden Democrats’ ranks. These people want solutions to real problems — such as a worrying spike in gang and drug-related shootings in several cities — without recourse to ethnic blame games and the vilification of “un-Swedish” culture. As a liberal democrat I will never approve of a party that celebrates its success with references to Hitler’s Nazi ideology, no matter the claim that only by sheer coincidence was the exclamation “Helg Seger” just one letter apart from a Nazi war cry.<<<
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Spartan
The Wiki article of Classic Liberalism contains "Classical liberalism is a political tradition and a branch of liberalism that advocates free market and laissez-faire economics; civil liberties under the rule of law with especial emphasis on individual autonomy, limited government, economic freedom, political freedom and freedom of speech."

Far cry from what we're seeing now.
If you actually read his post that you replied to you'll see that he wrote about "Liberal Democracy", including a link to Wiki for the same term.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
Sorry to see that you have many of the same problems as we do in the US. I hope it never reaches our level of crapulence.

Some of the problems that anger me most about the current situation in the US:

- Government is supposed to ensure safety- FAIL
- The media have too much influence on government, elections, general attitudes.
- Social Media is a scourge.
- Many people don't give a rat's ass about others, so they rob, beat, steal from them and murder. Preying on others has become a national pastime.
- Politics has become a crap show.
 
highfigh

highfigh

Seriously, I have no life.
If you actually read his post that you replied to you'll see that he wrote about "Liberal Democracy", including a link to Wiki for the same term.
You don't need to yell. His post is from his perspective, mine agrees with it even though we live in different places.

But you prefer to be a douche. Got it.
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Spartan
You don't need to yell. His post is from his perspective, mine agrees with it even though we live in different places.

But you prefer to be a douche. Got it.
You clearly have a reading comprehension problem.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
Interesting article concerning democracy in the American context.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
The Wiki article of Classic Liberalism contains "Classical liberalism is a political tradition and a branch of liberalism that advocates free market and laissez-faire economics; civil liberties under the rule of law with especial emphasis on individual autonomy, limited government, economic freedom, political freedom and freedom of speech."

Far cry from what we're seeing now.
Which concepts from the list in your post are you not seeing? Do you feel oppressed in some manner?
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Spartan
Interesting article concerning democracy in the American context.
I dunno, as the article does not mention money, finance or founding that is driving a big part of this. It does not even touch upon science apart from a "social-science experiment", or truth (not hits there). And some the US problems are structural, like their election system, no word about that either, with a zero-sum game of elections.

In Sweden the issues are different and so are the possible solutions. Actually, the same for all other countries.
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
I dunno, as the article does not mention money, finance or founding that is driving a big part of this. It does not even touch upon science apart from a "social-science experiment", or truth (not hits there). And some the US problems are structural, like their election system, no word about that either, with a zero-sum game of elections.
It certainly isn't all-encompassing, but the results of the study are interesting...if not encouraging.
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Spartan
It certainly isn't all-encompassing, but the results of the study are interesting...if not encouraging.
It's like that article about Putin you recently posted: Interesting but depressive.
 
Trell

Trell

Audioholic Spartan

My answer to the question in the title is no.
Agree to your answer, but I'll take up point that I see often but really disagree with: That liberal democracy, once obtained, will remain: I believe that every generation has to fight for this, and that the nature of the meaning as well as nature of that fight will change. The tools of oppression are different than a generation ago, and undoubtedly will change in the future.

>>>Despite their power, however, cultures can change as well as crumble. Today, Americans are doubting both their own democracy and the democratic idea itself. If a country can have a democratic culture in 2006 and then not have one in 2022, is it really a culture? Culture is sticky; it shouldn’t change so easily in just half a generation. I don’t believe that democracy is an aberration in human history, with an arc bending back toward authoritarianism.[italics added] But I do think we will move toward a shared realization that existential politics is no longer, if it ever was, primarily a Middle Eastern problem. It is a democratic problem. It is the problem of democracy. <<<
 
GO-NAD!

GO-NAD!

Audioholic Spartan
Democracy in Canada: will we heed the canary? - Fair Vote Canada

As with most democracies these days, Canada is not immune to the danger. One interesting tidbit that stands out to me, is that the "Democracy Index" places Sweden, with its proportional representation system at #1. Yet that system gave a decidedly authoritarian party significant standing in the Riksdag - 73 of 349 seats.
 

Latest posts

newsletter

  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top