From Dictators To Democracy
As the man who ran the man who organised the destruction of cities across Europe during World War II put it, “democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.” Considering that he also said that “the best argument against democracy is a five minute conversation with the average voter.” one can do more than wonder what he really thought of it.
I’m sure though, that Churchill was under no illusions what would have happened to him if Britain had lost the war while he was prime-minister. There would have been a vapid hide trial and an execution.
A hide trial? Well let’s face it. A show trial has more to do with hiding the truth than establishing it. As with watching a master magician, what you don’t see is far more important than what you do.
Take the trial of Saddam Houssein. What a soulless piece of flimflam. And what contempt to finally have him hanged on a holy day associated with sacrifice. I think the Iraq Freedom Congress has a concise summary, though I think the opening sentence reads a little strangely.
I got the link to the Iraq Freedom Congress from a post to the IATEFL Global Issue’s Special Interest Group. I find the Congress interesting because of its organisational structure. This has what it calls People’s Houses “where local people gather, organise, decide and exercise their sovereignty”. This sounds good to me though I am less certain about the following:
IFC offices are all elected except for the initial start up period or where elections can not be held due to security considerations. In such circumstances, the upper tier offices will appoint relevant officers.
One can understand the caution about holding elections in areas where death squads are operating. But I wonder why upper tier offices are required at all. If an organisation has a clear philosophy and a clear manifesto what need for top tier decisions? Why have such a hierarchy?
Without hierarchy, there would be no dictators. How much hierarchy does democracy really need?