So you think you know democracy

By MT Webmaster Last updated Feb 13, 2014

And that, Jacqueline Ann Surin, is my response to your lament regarding whether Malaysia is still a democratic country if Christians are not allowed to use the Allah word (not that I think Christians should not be allowed to use the Allah word).

NO HOLDS BARRED

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Yet, there is much more at stake than the Christians’ constitutional right to peacefully worship in whatever way they choose. This fight over a word (Allah) that has denoted God to both Christians and Muslims for centuries is critical for all Malaysians. Why? Because it will determine whether we subject ourselves to autocratic rule or whether we continue to live in a democracy.

Jacqueline Ann Surin

*********************************************

The people of England regards itself as free; but it is grossly mistaken; it is free only during the election of members of parliament. As soon as they are elected, slavery overtakes it, and it is nothing. The use it makes of the short moments of liberty it enjoys shows indeed that it deserves to lose them.

Rousseau in ‘Social Contract’

*********************************************

Democracy… is a charming form of government, full of variety and disorder; and dispensing a sort of equality to equals and unequals alike.

Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws.

One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.

Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something.

Rhetoric is the art of ruling the minds of men.

When the tyrant has disposed of foreign enemies by conquest or treaty, and there is nothing more to fear from them, then he is always stirring up some war or other, in order that the people may require a leader.

The rulers of the state are the only persons who ought to have the privilege of lying, either at home or abroad; they may be allowed to lie for the good of the state.

To prefer evil to good is not in human nature; and when a man is compelled to choose one of two evils, no one will choose the greater when he might have the less.

Plato

*********************************************

Basically, Jacqueline Ann Surin’s argument is whether Christians can or cannot use the Allah word would in the end determine whether we (Malaysians) subject ourselves to autocratic rule or whether we continue to live in a democracy.

And, today, I want to discuss that one magic word, democracy — probably the second-most magic word to that four letter word that starts with ‘F’ and ends with ‘K’, which we have already discussed in ‘Just emphasising a point’ (READ HERE).

Plato was actually very critical of democracy. He described democracy as irrational and was of the opinion that the people should not be entrusted with the job of ruling. Ruling should be left to the experts because the people were not expert enough to rule, argued Plato.

Democracy became a catchword back in 1999 when Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim tried but failed to topple Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad and was instead ousted. Anwar then hit back with the vengeance of a woman scorned and claimed the moral high ground and used the democracy platform to rally the people against his nemesis, Dr Mahathir.

In 2008, the ‘democracy fever’ became full blown when the people imagined themselves as standing on the side of virtue and this resulted in the best election performance ever for the opposition. The people had swallowed hook, line and sinker that at last their beloved country had found that magic formula for a better Malaysia, democracy.

Actually, democracy is overrated and even Plato thought so. He felt that the people really do not know what is good for them. It needs an autocratic ruler or a benevolent dictator to rule the country. The people should never be entrusted with this job of ruling.

I suppose Singapore would be one good example here. Singapore is called a democracy. Lee Kuan Yew, however, preferred to call it a guided democracy. In other words, Lee Kuan Yew was of the opinion that for that small Island State to survive, they needed an autocratic ruler who knew better what is good for the people since the people are too stupid to know what is good for them.

Nevertheless, the people need to think that they live in a democracy so an appearance of democracy has to be maintained. But it has to be restricted or limited democracy and the people must be made to believe that full blown democracy would not work in a country like Singapore that is surrounded by enemies who are plotting its downfall.

And because of that Singapore is very successful, more successful than Malaysia by far — because it did not believe in democracy.

Of course, when we say ‘rule’ there are two types of ruling. There is direct rule where all the people vote, such as in a referendum. Then there is indirect rule where the people elect a representative to rule on their behalf through a parliament.

The difference between these two concepts can be demonstrated by what is currently happening in Scotland. Around 300 years ago, the Parliaments of England and Scotland passed an Act to unite the two countries and merge the two Parliaments into the Parliament of Great Britain.

The Scottish people were never consulted as to whether they agreed to this union. It was merely an Agreement made by the Members of the Scottish Parliament. Most Scots were not too excited about the idea but since they had mandated all authority to the Members of Parliament there was nothing much they could do about it. Nevertheless, Scottish nationalism still remained strong until today.

That was the result of indirect rule and mandating authority to your elected Members of Parliament. And that is absolutely legal as it meets the democratic principle although one could question the morality of that move. Hence do not confuse legal with moral. Democracy may be legal but that does not always make it moral.

Now the Scottish people are being asked whether they still wish to remain in Great Britain or whether Scotland should be an independent nation. And the debate is raging in Scotland (estimated to be about 50:50). The only thing is this time it will not be Parliament or the peoples’ representatives in Parliament who are going to vote on the matter. The people themselves are going to directly vote. And this is going to be done through a referendum.

Hence this is going to be direct rule as opposed to the indirect rule of 300 years ago when Scotland merged with England.

I am using the Scottish example just to demonstrate the difference between direct rule and indirect rule, both democratic and legal, but one that is moral while the other immoral.

Malaysians love that magic word, democracy. And they constantly talk about that word and scream it from the rooftops. But Malaysians do not really understand what democracy means in spite of being so much in love with the concept. They think that democracy is a cure-all remedy for all the ills that the nation suffers from.

Democracy is not perfect or good. Democracy merely means the will of the majority over the minority. And democracy means mandating your power and authority to someone else to decide on your behalf. Plato calls it the tyranny of the majority. This means the majority can vote for laws that oppress the minority.

Hence whether Christians can or cannot use the Allah word is not going to affect democracy, as how Jacqueline Ann Surin says it would. It all depends on the will of the majority. And if the majority says Christians cannot use the Allah word then that is very democratic because democracy is about the will of the majority over the minority. It is about the majority passing laws that oppress the minority. It is about what Plato calls the tyranny of the majority.

And that was why Plato was critical of democracy and was also why Lee Kuan Yew opined that the people should not be trusted with democracy but needed to be guided and told what they can and cannot do.