The contempt for democracy
Think about this while you read press coverage of the student protests.
By Steven Baxter Published 10 December 2010 12:50This is a cross-post from Enemies of Reason
We'll read a lot about these student protests today. Much of the rage will focus on the fact that an elderly chutney maker had his car kicked in by some people on his way to see Michael McIntyre and Cheryl Cole perform in his honour. Some will deplore the breaking and burning of things by those whom Kay Burley would label as "insurgents". Some others, maybe a smaller number, will wonder if it's a tremendously excellent thing to charge at children with police horses or drag other people out of wheelchairs, or bash them over the head with batons, and all of that – but probably conclude that, yes, sadly, it's actually OK.
One thing that might come up a few times is the idea that a protest of this nature shows "contempt for democracy". If it is, you have to ask: who showed contempt for democracy first?
Is it contemptuous of democracy, for example, to tell people that you have certain policies, become elected because of their votes on the basis of what you've said, and then once you're safely in power for five years, turn around and say, "Look, I'm awfully sorry but things have changed – that manifesto which we said was our manifesto is more of a 'holding manifesto', to be broken open in the unlikely event that we ever get elected with an overall majority; and it is to be entirely ignored if we become part of a coalition, when we can cheerfully reject some or all of our promises?"
Is it contemptuous of democracy, for example, to not tell people that you're going to introduce something like tuition fees in the first place, but then, once you're safely elected, and having given no indication that you're going to introduce tuition fees, introduce tuition fees?
Does it say something about politicians' contempt for democracy, perhaps, that the country can go to war with a foreign power that poses no threat to it, based on no legitimate evidence whatsoever, and that no citizen of that country should have a say in the matter; that entirely peaceful protests should be completely and utterly ignored because it is history, not citizens, who are the real judge of a prime minister, and besides, God told him it would all be all right?
No, of course not. Have a patronising pat on the head and a biscuit to make you feel better. None of that is contempt for democracy at all; that's just part of the rich ebb and flow of parliamentary life, which is so very vital and important to everything getting done. Well, if people told you what they were going to do, or did the things they told you they were going to do, how on earth could things function then? It would almost be as if you were voting for parties based on certain principles, or values, and that they would stick to them, or something. And that would never do.
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists




















27 comments
Excellent article, Steven Baxter, in every respect.
Yes, Mr Clegg, the students are 'dreaming' if they think that your commitments and promises mean anything more than an illusory bait for votes.
The Wikileaks show, if one ever doubted it, that a substantial dimension of politics is kept safely out of the view of prying eyes.
George Orwell would have nodded knowingly if had heard senior police officers talk about the 'extraordinary restraint' of their officers when fifty or so protesters are hospitalized by police assaults.
The police logic seems to be: if some protesters are violent, assaulting those innocent of violence is justified. See how that would fare as a defence in a court of law.
I agree what to politicians expect when they show such contempt for the students views and refuse to enter into a discussion with them about the whole tuition fee rise? Instead they label anyone opposed to the increase as either not understanding the changes or having been misled by the subversive lot at the NUS and also by the Labour party. Maybe if the coalition treated the students like adults and not children they would act like adults and not result to acts of violence. But they aren't they are just ignoring them hoping they can scare them using the police and they will just go away. I don't condone the violent action of some protesters but i emphasis because what else are they left with when the government doesn't want to listen to them?
Democracy only really says that we get a guaranteed right to throw out governments we don't like. Nowhere does democracy say that the governments we do elect have to behave exactly as we'd like at all times - they're provided with a strong enough incentive to do so by the first point. If the polls are to be believed, the Lib Dems will learn this one the hard way. Karl Popper pointed out the similarity to his conception of the scientific method - governments are experiments and we can only judge their success in retrospect. The thing about experiments is that sometimes they merely prove that something doesn't work.
On that basis, you can describe this as contempt for the voters who were swayed by arguments over tuition fees, but I don't think you can describe it as contempt for democracy itself.
The true contempt for democracy was shown by the violent assaults on protestors by the MetComs riotsquad. No prizes for guessing how many of them will be up before the beak!
Rob, what you describe is elected dictatorship. Democracy is "government by the people"
The contempt for democracy comes from the political-left. Labour lost the election. Fact!! the only reason we don't have a massive Tory majority is, three good performances from Mr Clegg. Labour deserved to lose and lose badly. The political and financial disaster left behind will not only effect this generation but generations to come.
Oh dear, don't you like criticism?
Oops, wrong blog. Apologies. Wine taken.
Question - in a democracy, should not the people (with or without an axe to grind) be allowed to go about their daily lives without unnecessary disruption ? (road blocks, diverted traffic, closed off public spaces etcetera).
If you must 'grind your axes' in public you should do so without hindering everyone else. Better still, save your axe grinding until the election campaign and protest where it really matters - the ballot box.
For the sake of mainstream society going about its business methinks the 'right' to protest on public ground should be limited maybe banned.
Ah, the NS finally coming around to the limitations of government. Perhaps the NS should now stop calling for the government to have even more power, seeing as governments can't be trusted with it?
Attacks on the Royal Family is nothing new. Remember the Gordon Riots and, when a former Prince of Wales later George IV being humiliated by the London mob after his separation from the Princess Caroline. Its an occupational hazard for the Royals, particularly when there is little love for the Royals these days.
But for Cameron to call a student demo 'a mob' is an absolute disgrace, a slur on all students including those children doing their A Levels who unwittingly got caught up in some unpleasant events.
Ha! Excellent post. Just finished a screed on a similar theme:
http://patosgood.blogspot.com/2010/12/slaying-cable.html
'Luddite' coupla things, bank/bond holder bailouts (i.e. Ireland), conspiracy theories (i.e. 9/11), MPs expenses, Iraq war... Could go on but I think you're American and considering the American Right's attitude I think you understand my point (tea party). This (good) article would be better titled 'contempt for the processes of western democracy as it currently functions' but that's a bit unwieldy. Anyhow, you know it's not just the 'Left' that's at fault, don't you.
Luddite
Affect, not effect.
and besides, god told him it would all be all right?
God said NO to all the evil works of Parliament well in advance... they will all be damned to damned hell,no excuses no exceptions... but first there is "VENGEANCE" "I will repay sayeth the Lord"
Rob@12.17 said "Karl Popper pointed out the similarity to his conception of the scientific method - governments are experiments and we can only judge their success in retrospect."
Uh, that's not quite what Popper said; his point was that flawed legislation can have godawful consequences, and therefore policy needs to be critiqued and judged as thoroughly as possible before it reached the statute books. Popper did say that our actions have unintended consequences, as the Cleggster is currently finding out.
The peasants can't afford to learn to read & write so it's ok if those that can read the news learn about the Lord of the Manor's cart being kicked.
========= http://clothesmall.org =========
Best regards for you all,
Looking forward to your visiting.
========= http://clothesmall.org =========
democracy has left these islands and for it to return we need a popular revolution
========= http://www.1shopping.us/ =========
Best regards for you all,
Looking forward to your visiting.
========= http://www.1shopping.us/ =========
'Robert Taggart' - "Better still, save your axe grinding until the election campaign and protest where it really matters - the ballot box."
Taggart old boy, that's kinda what the LibDem voters did, before the event. And...Geddit?
When voting comes down to choosing which party is least likely to break some ethical moral or statutory law, it isn't really democracy. I mean come on mostly voting is about choosing the least worst option. Only a child believes what a politician tells him during an election is true.
The tuition fee farce is only one indicator of the deep seated latent fury that is growing inside many people who know that the government are engaging in a political 'shell game' to get us to take our eye of the real problems. Problems like unfair and abhorrent tax laws created to keep the banking institutions rich, repugnant policies that has already cost care for the vulnerable it first line of defence. The total lack of trust in a political institution [Not just the present govt] that is geared towards 'me myself and I' even if it breaks the odd law or two.
I can feel anger in my chest even as a write these words because there is no real forum in which a person can be heard today so let's not be surprised when frustration at not being listened to by politicians boils over into violence.
@Luddite
Lib Dem LOST seats at the election.
Wishful thinking V fact on your part
LibDems saying pre-election that they are against stoning, and then a few months later saying opposite, might wound up a few of their voters, especially if they are young and able and life-giving sharpend of their human lifedom.
And Hey Presto!
Stoning is an allegorical term, which in ten years from now, no one under 25 will understand, since humanity studies were snuffed.
Snuffed? Not that is another metaphysical arguement...
..Now that is, even...
Boots, and a laser harp, please,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_b85AM8Pho
Engineering meets humanities metaphysicality.
...one feeds off the other, in our Brit society - the blacksmth and the poet wordsmith, in time in past memorium.