During the Iraq war, people against the actions of the American government often reasoned "we have nothing against the American people. It's the American government that's the problem!" to justify anti-American sentiment. In the Middle-East, the same logic applies. To Western eyes, Iran is in fact a moderate nation who happens to be run by madmen who don't represent the will of the people.
Which begs the question: Is it possible to separate the people from its government? Are they not extensions of one another? Or are we in a situation where the few actually do manage to seize control and power thus creating a distant discord between citizen and government?
Chomp on that while you clip your toe nails.
There's some truth in what you're saying, I believe.
ReplyDelete"Un popolo di merda si merita un governo di merda"
[read on a Spanish newspaper, but can't rewrite it in Spanish]
Which begs my *cry*:
**And us? Which kind of people are we who have Berlusconi???**
After all even Dante had chanted (if I remember well):
Ahi serva Italia di dolore ostello
Non donna di provincie ma bordello!
(donna = domina = signora)
PS
I might look I was kidding, but I was not.
Interesting question from Commentator and reply from MoR. As long as, in many countries, less than 40% of the population votes and split, as in Israel and other proportional systems, vote for some 30 parties that then vie for a piece of the pie in "coalitions", the goverments will not truly represent THE PEOPLE.
ReplyDeleteThe USA is another problem. The President and his Men have so much power that they really may take the country where the citizens do not want to go. Iraq and Afghanistan are a case in point.
In Canada we currently have the same problem, 64% of the voters in the last election did not vote Conservative and the spineless majority opposition lets them get away with murder.
Paul, it can be what the Commentator said cannot be demonstrated with exact numbers, even though what you say makes sense.
ReplyDeleteI prefer an indistinct explanation. Some examples.
People who accept a tyrant (there are many in Africa or in Arabic countries; and Russia?) belong more or less to a type of culture where democracy cannot be exported so easily since various degrees of ... slavery? are in their DNA.
Italians did invent Fascism? They have /had some undemocratic tendency to serve (ahi serva Italia ...) a Big Man, like, with varying degrees, the French or the Spanish or the Portuguese etc.(a Caudillo, De Gaulle etc.).
Did the English have invent the Parliamentary democracy? (after the Greeks, bien sure)
In 1215 they had already obliged King John of England AD to provide the people with certain rights - Magna Charta - , at a time when Dante was about to write "Ahi serva Italia" and to beg the German emperor to pls come back and rule (and enslave) our chaos.
The being being long.
What I mean is for once I agree with Commentator (lol):
ReplyDeleteIs it possible to separate the people from its government? Not much. They are part of the same culture.
(un popolo di merda etc. etc.)
There is a saying that we get the rulers we deserve. We deserve what we have through our apathy and mindlessness as citizens. We have the tools, we just don't use them.
ReplyDeleteI agree some continents do not have a democratic traditional culture and Europe, as a whole, longs for the era of absolute monarchy.
However be it voter apathy, acceptance of authoritarian rulers or longing for them, it all stems from one single trait: refusal to bear responsibility and reliance on someone else to make decisions for us.
"For once?" I'm saddened by this!
ReplyDeleteI shall attempt to reply to your comments shortly.
Commentator, I was kidding. I agree with many things you write. Not with all of them, which is part of life. If I agreed on all of them I would not find you interesting.
ReplyDelete