We live in extraordinary times. So much so, this is the second blog in a row with a political theme. The topic I want to address this month is democracy.

I want to start off by making it clear that I am an advocate of democracy. I am by no means going to attack the principle of fair representation and the right to vote. These are things that previous generations bravely and fiercely fought for which had been prohibited for the preceding centuries of modern history.

It would be foolish, however, not to be critical of the current state of democracy. Democracy is something that we should want to maintain, nurture and improve. We do not want to rest on our laurels and allow it to degenerate.

Imagine democracy as a car. As a result of the industrial revolution, the car was a new means of freedom and power but was only accessible to the gentry. With time, courage and fight we all acquired the opportunity to possess a car. You are thrilled to be offered a car and you accept it as something of great value, but is it fit for purpose? Is it even road legal? Does its design follow logically from its greatest intention? I would argue that it currently doesn’t.

My gripe with British democracy in 2019 is two-fold: a lack of equality and a lack of effect.

‘First Past the Post’ is a joke system that one would expect to read about in a history of Victorian scam artists. It takes your vote and makes it as a tenuously democratic as possible within the boundaries of its definition. If forty-nine percent of the population vote for a particular party and their principles, they deserve to be represented in Parliament. In the current system, although highly unlikely, it is theoretically possible that this party would have absolutely no seats!

The only egalitarian way to translate votes into seats is to assign members of Parliament in proportion to the overall popular vote. This creates one issue. If we take the previous example of a 51/49 vote split, nearly half the house would be made up of the losing party who also happened to not win the popular vote in a single constituency. Is it fair to assign an MP to a constituency that they didn’t win?

I think the answer is to go one step further and replace the House of Lords with a house comprised of these elected local representatives. In our extreme example the entirety of this house would be made up by the winning party. This would allow for a separate and meaningful forum for local issues that could be fed to the Commons but that could not control the national will of the people.

I think that a representational voting system is an achievable goal and one that would not be reversed. It may take some time for the conditions to arise to get the legislation passed but if it was it would instantly change the political landscape of the country.

The second part to my complaint is somewhat more controversial and far less likely to be undertaken. How do we give more power to the voter? How can a citizen have more influence beyond voting?

Switzerland, in my opinion, has the most democratic system of any developed Western country. They practice a direct democracy alongside a representative one. The representative element is much as described above, but between general elections the public can have a direct say on individual matters in one of three ways:

Mandatory Referendums – modifications to the constitution, substantial financial decisions or adhesion to supranational communities have to be passed by a double majority (of the total votes cast and the number of cantons in favour).

Optional Referendums – any law that passes in the Federal Assembly may be challenged by the people and put to a vote by collecting 50,000 opposing signatures.

Federal Popular Initiatives – a modification of the constitution can be put forward to a popular vote by collecting 100,000 supporting signatures.

Polling occurs almost every quarter, where several votes may be made simultaneously.

For the British public to wield such political power is a dream. It would have a profound effect on how we identify with our nation and be a real motivation to make a difference in our communities. Political engagement would have true meaning, far beyond impotent armchair indignation or smugness.

A final comment I’d like to make is on localism. Direct democracy at a constituency level would be an even greater progression, but for this to have any real significance would require devolvement on some level. Politically liberated constituencies, however, would only be desirable in a nation where mobility is attainable by all. Deconstructed political power and freedom of movement would have to go hand-in-hand to avoid marginalising and oppressing minorities.

If we are to respect democracy and accept it as the bedrock of our differing political alliances we need to take measures to fortify it and entrench it further in the meaningful actions of all, lest we be in danger of one day allowing an ideology to infiltrate our system and close the eyelids over its vacant and misty final stare.

This month's favourites:
   Silvana Imam, Helig Moder
   Ray Dalio, Principles
   All That Jazz (1979)