On the state of democracy
1. What´s happening in Portugal´s political system is a good example of
what´s happening in many other countries. It should cause concern and
serve as an example for citizens all over the world.
After democracy was restored in 1974, several of the most well-prepared figures of all fields of knowledge made themselves available to civic participation through politics. They played key roles in successive governments, moved by the desire to lift the country´s standard of living.
This scenario has changed dramatically with the institutionalization of democracy. The representative system became the ideal place for opportunists and careerists. The best and the most competent, in most of the cases, have given up on politics, disappointed with the prevalent mediocrity and irresponsibility (and with the dirty game usually needed to pass the close scrutiny of both party and media to get elected). Some of them sought refuge in the university or managing businesses; others limit their civic participation to attending rallies or writing protest articles and books; others still have left the country, as the Portuguese always did (“Thro’ seas where sail was never spread before”).
Meanwhile, the political power has quietly and progressively been taken by people that have nothing else on their resumes other than being members of the political youth organizations (see the Portuguese PM and the opposition leader, both of the same fabric) and/or the freemasonry.
The neo-liberal spirit has taken over. The idea that the people’s impoverishment is a necessary thing and will regenerate society is making its way.
The political parties have become specialized in influence peddling and in maintaining the privileges of those who are, in one way or another, linked to those parties, including the influential families.
The outlook doesn’t get better if we look at the opposition, where demagogy abounds, mixed with unrealistic and “magical solutions”. This occurs in such a way that the Communist Party, which once supported the putsch aimed at overthrowing Gorbachev and that doubted if “North Korea is not a real democracy”, is gaining ground.
Considering all this, one must conclude that the fallacious Portuguese democracy is becoming a hoax. There’s no other way to put it. As a result, the country lost its sovereignty, accepting all the diktats from its creditors. And this is happening in other countries too.
In my opinion, reversing this perilous situation is only possible with a healthier democracy, where politics is not a career and civism is effective. More authoritarianism and “fiscal terrorism” are not good ways, but that’s what (indirectly and through non-democratic means) we currently have.
2. In the outcome of the Legislative Election in Macau, a TV debate and several newspaper columns focused on the possibility (or not) of democracy here. On one side, Hoje Macau director Carlos Morais José doesn’t suport universal suffrage in Macau because, he says, there isn’t a local citizenship: “This is a migrants’ land and their sense of belonging (not to mention identity) to Macau is scarce. Considering the half million inhabitants, I estimate that about 10% have their profound roots here and those, probably, don’t even vote. The low voting turnout demonstrates the lack of interest for the public cause. Universal suffrage to elect what, or worse, whom? In fact, having universal suffrage would mean a huge risk in seeing some newcomer being elected to CE whose relation to the region is vague and strictly concerned with financial reasons,” he wrote. Morais José further argued that Macau’s gaming-based economy “can’t and shouldn’t be controlled by the first person that manages to buy more votes.”
On the other side, commentators like Paulo Rêgo and Frederico Rato stressed that they would prefer some democratic perversities to a dictatorship.
One question remains to be answered: Is a democratic system viable in such a small and sui generis place like Macau? Or, even after democracy is instituted following Hong Kong, will it remain a mere formality or become a real democracy?
(by PB)
After democracy was restored in 1974, several of the most well-prepared figures of all fields of knowledge made themselves available to civic participation through politics. They played key roles in successive governments, moved by the desire to lift the country´s standard of living.
This scenario has changed dramatically with the institutionalization of democracy. The representative system became the ideal place for opportunists and careerists. The best and the most competent, in most of the cases, have given up on politics, disappointed with the prevalent mediocrity and irresponsibility (and with the dirty game usually needed to pass the close scrutiny of both party and media to get elected). Some of them sought refuge in the university or managing businesses; others limit their civic participation to attending rallies or writing protest articles and books; others still have left the country, as the Portuguese always did (“Thro’ seas where sail was never spread before”).
Meanwhile, the political power has quietly and progressively been taken by people that have nothing else on their resumes other than being members of the political youth organizations (see the Portuguese PM and the opposition leader, both of the same fabric) and/or the freemasonry.
The neo-liberal spirit has taken over. The idea that the people’s impoverishment is a necessary thing and will regenerate society is making its way.
The political parties have become specialized in influence peddling and in maintaining the privileges of those who are, in one way or another, linked to those parties, including the influential families.
The outlook doesn’t get better if we look at the opposition, where demagogy abounds, mixed with unrealistic and “magical solutions”. This occurs in such a way that the Communist Party, which once supported the putsch aimed at overthrowing Gorbachev and that doubted if “North Korea is not a real democracy”, is gaining ground.
Considering all this, one must conclude that the fallacious Portuguese democracy is becoming a hoax. There’s no other way to put it. As a result, the country lost its sovereignty, accepting all the diktats from its creditors. And this is happening in other countries too.
In my opinion, reversing this perilous situation is only possible with a healthier democracy, where politics is not a career and civism is effective. More authoritarianism and “fiscal terrorism” are not good ways, but that’s what (indirectly and through non-democratic means) we currently have.
2. In the outcome of the Legislative Election in Macau, a TV debate and several newspaper columns focused on the possibility (or not) of democracy here. On one side, Hoje Macau director Carlos Morais José doesn’t suport universal suffrage in Macau because, he says, there isn’t a local citizenship: “This is a migrants’ land and their sense of belonging (not to mention identity) to Macau is scarce. Considering the half million inhabitants, I estimate that about 10% have their profound roots here and those, probably, don’t even vote. The low voting turnout demonstrates the lack of interest for the public cause. Universal suffrage to elect what, or worse, whom? In fact, having universal suffrage would mean a huge risk in seeing some newcomer being elected to CE whose relation to the region is vague and strictly concerned with financial reasons,” he wrote. Morais José further argued that Macau’s gaming-based economy “can’t and shouldn’t be controlled by the first person that manages to buy more votes.”
On the other side, commentators like Paulo Rêgo and Frederico Rato stressed that they would prefer some democratic perversities to a dictatorship.
One question remains to be answered: Is a democratic system viable in such a small and sui generis place like Macau? Or, even after democracy is instituted following Hong Kong, will it remain a mere formality or become a real democracy?
(by PB)
0 Comentários:
Enviar um comentário
Subscrever Enviar feedback [Atom]
<< Página inicial