Published Wednesday, October 3, 2007 at 22:54
by
carl0s 
(1273 views and 3 comments)
I've heard it said that Russia could now be described as a "managed democracy." Control of the media and state apparatus is said to have tilted the electorate in a way that democratic debate exists within a pre-defined criteria.
President Putin, who appears to be popular anyway, can point out that many Western democracies also function in a similar way. The parameters in which they operate are often determined by access to money and media, and these often implicitly or explicitly contain an ideology. An example of this could be the "Cola" Presidents, whereby different soft drinks companies back presidential candidates in the US. Of course, this is generally to achieve the opening of new markets overseas for their companies. So the implicit ideology here is free trade, to the point of bargaining the right to sell fizzy drinks to poor countries.
In such an environment, should the EU attempt to curtail the concentration of political power in corporate hands and act to regulate all corporate lobbying of government within its jurisdiction? Should it be passing laws to ensure a plurality of media, and preventing singularly powerful figures from owning large chunks of various media outlets?
The EU can only set an example to the world, as perfect democracy is hard to find. But if we are serious that the EU should be the benchmark for democratic standards, then the way our electorates are influenced and cajoled should be examined. The end result of this process could only be a stronger EU where national and regional representatives move in step with the people who elect them. At the moment, the gap between leaders and the led appears to be a chasm.
loading...
Comments
1. Europe is not flawless by editor on Friday, October 5, 2007 at 12:54
Thank you very much for your contribution. It certainly is an exciting topic and, given the latest events, the timing could not be more appropriate! The democratic deficit in Russia and the centralisation and concentration of power are matters of concern for several members of the international community. Human rights and civil society, including freedom of speech, media independence, operational rules of NGOs and xenophobia, are some of the issues raised in debates about Russia at present. Russia, for its part, points to prejudice and counters critiques arguing they do not reflect reality. The killing of journalist Anna Politkovskaya, the new law allowing monitoring of foreign and domestic NGOs to allegedly stop foreign governments’ interference and the death of former Russian security officer Alexander Litvinenko have added further doubts as to the current situation. President Vladimir Putin recent declaration to be the leading candidate of Russia's dominant political party in parliamentary elections in December, with the possibility of becoming the country's prime minister next year, provides additional ground for critics. Looking at these developments, conclusions can be worrying. It is also true, however, that the spotlight is rarely pointed to EU member states, which have on some occasions shown they not always are flawless democracies with impeccable records. And this point is very eloquently expressed in discussions between the EU and Russia within the OSCE on the human dimension, the location of missions and monitoring. What should the PES manifesto say about strengthening democracy in Europe? Let us know your thoughts!2. A few ideas... by carl0s
on Sunday, October 7, 2007 at 13:50
Essentially he charge here is that the EU and the US is guilty of hypocrisy. Combined with the dubious nature of "The War On Terror" this is an idea that has currency in the wider world. To answer this, the EU should ask member states to submit the whole electoral process to scrutiny. Each state can be given marks for: Media balance - The balance of broadcast media, state and independent. How ownership is concentrated, and how bias is monitored. External influences - the extent to which policy is influenced by non-EU member states, and the implications for domestic politics. Financial interests - the extent to which governments interests are coloured by commercial connections, and how various interests access is provided to the top levels of government. Internal politics - the extent to which political parties allow participation in their policy-making process. After a score is provided, the EU can make recommendations, in some cases, with the option of sanctions or fines. And this would give us a basis to criticise !3. Utopia by Muriel on Friday, October 19, 2007 at 10:25
Ces questions nous amènent à nous pencher sur les bases mêmes de la démocratie. Il semble évident que le régime russe dans sa forme actuelle n'est pas ce que l'on peut communément appeler un régime démocratique, pour toutes les raisons exposées ci-dessus. Il est également vrai que certains pays européens prennent une voie dans la direction opposée d'un approfondissement de la démocratie. Nous devons rester vigilants face à ce phénomène, car, bien souvent, nous avons tendance à nous habituer à cette évolution qui se fait en douceur, suivant l'évolution des changements sociétaux en eux-mêmes. C'est un peu le principe de la grenouille dans l'eau bouillante: si l'on place une grenouille dans l'eau bouillante, elle aura le réflexe de s'évader immédiatement, réflexe de survie. Par contre, si on la place dans l'eau froide, en faisant chauffer l'eau lentement, la grenouille se fait à la température et peut rester dans l'eau bouillante sans bouger, à l'agonie. C'est aussi ce qui se passe dans nos démocraties actuelles. Si, au sortir de la guerre, nous avions été confrontés aux régimes actuels, un sursaut populaire aurait tenté de tirer la sonnette d'alarme et de réformer le système. Par contre, soixante ans plus tard, notre conception de la démocratie a changé et nous assistons sans broncher à une radicalisation de certains régimes. L'idée de Car10s, de fixer des critères, semble attrayante. Mais elle semble aussi fort utopique. Il faudrait pour cela se mettre d'accord sur une définition commune des différents critères qui constitueraient une démocratie. Or, les différences de culture, d'histoire propre à chaque pays, et de réalité du terrain semblent être un obstacle non négligeable à un tel processus. Il ne faut pas pour autant baisser les bras et être frappé d'un fatalisme immobilisant. Il faudrait plutôt définir des conditions basiques des régimes démocratiques et, dans une mesure qui pourrait être définie par chaque pays avec une certaine liberté adaptée à sa réalité, les imposer aux pays membres. Il faudrait ensuite effectivement faire un bilan régulier de ces questions. La démocratie ne doit pas être associée à la liberté totale. Les régimes démocratiques doivent parfois prendre des mesures contraignantes pour assurer leur propre survie. Mais cela est déjà problématique dans le cadre uniquement national, imaginons le cadre supranational! Bref, un long chemin reste à parcourrir...To be able to post comments you need to be logged in. No account yet? Register here! Lost your password?