The Third World War

So a democratic government has once more cracked up in the motherland of democracy. Actually, the democracy of ancient Attica would never have passed muster at the UN Assembly or the Warren Court. “Tribal oligarchy” would be a more accurate term. Only enrolled male adult members of the tribes of the official list took part in political life; “foreigners” (Le., non-members) and _ slaves, together a majority, were excluded. Even this somemen one-vote system prevailed only a few decades. Since the surrender of Athens at the close of the Peloponnesian Wars 2,371 years ago, democracy has had hard sledding in Greece. Greece is not alone in Europe in having trouble with democracy. In fact, only a minority of European states have democratic governments; the nine nations of eastern Europe plus Yugoslavia, Albania, Portugal, Spain and East Germany do not. No more than three or four nations (India, Japan, Philippines = -…). can qualify in Asia; none, really, in Africa. Hardly any Latin American nations can manage more than a few years without a coup. The belief that democracy is the best form of government is an axiom of the American faith; and it is an axiom of American policy to seek to promote democracy everywhere. Truly, we are not very democratic, about democracy. We tell all peoples they ought to be democratic and try to make them become democratic, without much regard to their own ideas and wishes. May it not be that through this bias we occasionally impose an unsuitable and sometimes crippling burden? The record, present and past, does not seem to recommend democracy as a universally appropriate and workable form of government. Gaetano Mosca, observing that autocracy —in which “authority is transmitted from above downward in the political and social scale”—has in fact been the dominant form of political organization, commented: “A political system [autocracy] that has been so widely recurring and so long enduring among peoples of the most widely various civilizations, who often have had no contacts material or intellectual with one another, must correspond to something in the political nature of man.”

We define as “democratic” a government based on “the voluntary consent of the governed.” In practice we interpret “voluntary consent” to mean that, a) the ruling offices are submitted periodically to a_ secret ballot of a fairly large percentage of the adult population; b) the citizens are free to oppose the incumbent rulers and policies; c) the mechanism of the ballot offers a choice between incumbents and the opposition. Philosophical considerations aside, this democratic formula has seemed to have the great practical advantage of providing a peaceful and relatively orderly outlet for the discontent and opposition that inevitably arise within every society. Political scientists recognize that there are cultural and economic preconditions of genuine democratic government: a minimum of literacy, somewhat more than bare subsistence economically, a functioning system of internal communications and transport, ete. Still more crucial is a general acceptance of the rules of the democratic game: that the rulers will allow the opposition a voice and a chance to win by the ballot; that the present rulers will give way peacefully if the opposition does win; and—no less essential though less often remarked—that the Outs will not push their opposition struggle to a level that subverts the democratic political order itself. As in the case of any other game, you can play democracy only with those who are willing to abide by the rules.

JB

About the Author

James Burnham

Featured Tags

So a democratic government has once more cracked up in the motherland of democracy. Actually, the democracy of ancient Attica would never have passed muster at the UN Assembly or the Warren Court. “Tribal oligarchy” would be a more accurate term. Only enrolled male adult members of the tribes of the official list took part in political life; “foreigners” (Le., non-members) and _ slaves, together a majority, were excluded. Even this somemen one-vote system prevailed only a few decades. Since the surrender of Athens at the close of the Peloponnesian Wars 2,371 years ago, democracy has had hard sledding in Greece. Greece is not alone in Europe in having trouble with democracy. In fact, only a minority of European states have democratic governments; the nine nations of eastern Europe plus Yugoslavia, Albania, Portugal, Spain and East Germany do not. No more than three or four nations (India, Japan, Philippines = -…). can qualify in Asia; none, really, in Africa. Hardly any Latin American nations can manage more than a few years without a coup. The belief that democracy is the best form of government is an axiom of the American faith; and it is an axiom of American policy to seek to promote democracy everywhere. Truly, we are not very democratic, about democracy. We tell all peoples they ought to be democratic and try to make them become democratic, without much regard to their own ideas and wishes. May it not be that through this bias we occasionally impose an unsuitable and sometimes crippling burden? The record, present and past, does not seem to recommend democracy as a universally appropriate and workable form of government. Gaetano Mosca, observing that autocracy —in which “authority is transmitted from above downward in the political and social scale”—has in fact been the dominant form of political organization, commented: “A political system [autocracy] that has been so widely recurring and so long enduring among peoples of the most widely various civilizations, who often have had no contacts material or intellectual with one another, must correspond to something in the political nature of man.”

We define as “democratic” a government based on “the voluntary consent of the governed.” In practice we interpret “voluntary consent” to mean that, a) the ruling offices are submitted periodically to a_ secret ballot of a fairly large percentage of the adult population; b) the citizens are free to oppose the incumbent rulers and policies; c) the mechanism of the ballot offers a choice between incumbents and the opposition. Philosophical considerations aside, this democratic formula has seemed to have the great practical advantage of providing a peaceful and relatively orderly outlet for the discontent and opposition that inevitably arise within every society. Political scientists recognize that there are cultural and economic preconditions of genuine democratic government: a minimum of literacy, somewhat more than bare subsistence economically, a functioning system of internal communications and transport, ete. Still more crucial is a general acceptance of the rules of the democratic game: that the rulers will allow the opposition a voice and a chance to win by the ballot; that the present rulers will give way peacefully if the opposition does win; and—no less essential though less often remarked—that the Outs will not push their opposition struggle to a level that subverts the democratic political order itself. As in the case of any other game, you can play democracy only with those who are willing to abide by the rules.