 |
Daniel Hutchinson From The Hutch |
New Zealand is the second most democratic country in the world. We are so democratic that it's hard to keep up with.
There are elections for central government, local government, community boards, health boards, incorporated clubs and societies and the list goes on.
Listed companies, clubs and charities are required to divulge most of their financial and strategic information each year.
Democracy even spills over into homes with informal votes held on everything from what town to live in, to whether to have fish and chips or KFC for dinner.
Down the drain
We've literally got democracy up the wazoo, because what we flush is disposed of efficiently and environmentally or we vote in someone that we hope will manage it better.
We are part of a dwindling number of countries that are improving their democracies. Our second placing in the Economic Intelligence Unit's 2021 Democracy Index was an improvement on fourth in the 2020 version.
So when the central government stripped Tauranga City Council of its elected members in 2020, democratic eyebrows furrowed deeply.
The non-elected commissioners are now advocating for a delay to local government elections in the city this year because it is afraid publicly elected members will overturn all its good work.
This is pretty much based on a fear that all that good work might be hugely unpopular but, that is the flaw with democracy, isn't it?
The common problem
The city and surrounds are hugely popular thanks to a burgeoning economy and a lifestyle that is hard to beat.
It's a hard sell to ask those already living here – many on fixed incomes or paying the high price to move here – to pay for further growth.
Throwing local democracy out the window is the easy answer. The work needs to be done and we can't have local people and their pesky opinions holding up the works.
You could say the same thing about the Government's plan to divest local councils of their water assets – we will no longer have democracy up the wazoo – or its decision to abolish district health boards.
People have been remarkably accepting of these big changes to our democracy, although the strong Treaty of Waitangi influences, present in both of these plans, has always been a hard sell. You simply can't honour obligations to an indigenous minority without tampering with democracy in its simplest form.
Clearly, we have a bit of wiggle room before we reach the level of Russia, which is 126th on the list as an 'authoritarian” state.
Democracy is not the norm
But there are only 21 full democracies on the Democracy Index. Interestingly, the United States isn't one of them. It comes in at 26th on the list – one of 53 'flawed democracies”.
Only about half the world's population lives in either a ‘full' or ‘flawed' democracy. The rest fall under a ‘hybrid' or ‘authoritarian' structure.
It would be interesting to let everyone in the world vote on their preferred method of governance.
Strong, autocratic leadership has often been the preferred, or only option for countries used to violence and poverty.
Better to have a roof over your head, food in the stomach and order on the streets than a meaningful say in how the affairs of state are conducted.
We are not in that situation fortunately. The masses are highly educated, socially benevolent and very critical of the quality of news and information that we are presented with.
Many of us still value strong leadership over the combined credentials of a team of elected members and we are still susceptible to an erosion of democracy.
However, even authoritarian regimes like Putin's Russia require a lot of groundwork and coercion of public opinion. Major economic and social upheaval is a threat to those regimes.
Dictatorship 101
Lots of scholars have studied what it takes to be a successful dictator, but my favourite is Dr Mark van Vugt and his Seven Steps to Becoming a Dictator analysis in ‘Psychology Today'.
In addition to killing off or jailing your enemies, those steps include nepotism and bribery to start with, followed by the need to gain a monopoly over the use of force to curb protest.
Controlling the free flow of information is important so having a massive, state-run media is a good start and there's nothing like a good battle against a common enemy to galvanise the public.
Running an orderly country with plenty of the basics and a few treats thrown in now and again to appease the masses is always a good one to prevent a revolution.
So, not too much difference to a democracy really.
daniel@thesun.co.nz
