Autonomy and Democracy (part 1?)

i have to admit with my semi-drunken-like state, headache, listening to slayer and the lack of will power to further research on the subject matter above; i am in no position to articulate this mini short essay well. i intent to write something intelligent, where theory are put to practice and i might just fail horribly.

second, i have been battling with the idea of “democracy” for a long time, sometimes i would say i am a disbeliever , and the over-used of the term or concept just makes it like a “commodity” or a marketing promotion gimmick because it is the “in” thing at the moment; a must have feature for all state government.

but maybe i am a silent believer of Socretes’ concerns and disregard/dislike for democracy, even i cannot recall much from the Republic, i think i remember plato/socretes had valid arguments against democracy.

in addition, i can somehow “see” vaguely how democracy can be problematic and open for abuse in various situation within the right and the left. lot of abuse – and i would like to attempt to highlight the problem, hopefully able to persuade people to view democratic process differently.


i do not think i want to write the definition of democracy, and the history of it – plus, frankly, i do not know.

sometimes, autonomy and the vague concept of democracy spark conflict, the government could say its for the people, it is the people’s will to developed this land and according to their needs. So lets say yea, it’s was really purely by the people, it was majority, near 90% of the population. And they say lets flatten this piece of land and build shops, houses, farms, factories, and casinos.
within the 10% who either did not care to vote, disagree or did not want to participate in that decision.
0.19% of the population happen to have conducted studies in this ares for the past 35 years and the studies shows: “there are many unidentified species in the area that could lead to the discovery of a cure for cancer. If this land is develop, it would really offset climate change. there are indigenous people living in this ares, their way of life will be destroy if we develop this land. etc”

however, the population decides to ignore the concerns and objections – democracy is at hand, the people in a particular society within a particular paradigm wanted “progress”, wanted more fancy restaurants, more housing and entertainment.

obviously, the context is set on a post-industrial era – where national identity seem to be the only bond among people, where community has collapses, where nature is secondary, individual human desire first, where commence is the norm for human interaction. i mean, these are the conditions, but the people really have the power to decide. Majority decided to develop that land, the population also decided to split into interest groups and develop different ares respectively – so yea there is local council thing going on. ( i’m trying to make it as none representative as possible, that majority are very much involve with the whole process)

my question is – is this democracy?

what if this very people wants to rage war against the indigenous people because they are hindering the process of progress/ development – is this democracy?

i would say “yea” it is, unfortunately… and we are probably in the most dangerous era to exercise this power ( if possible )

democracy itself is a weird social governance; it makes no sense without the complexity of social beliefs, modes of interaction, moral values, prospective on existence, and meaningness of life. These pre-sets are the conditions for democracy to function, however it will function through a series of democratic process. it is based on principles of the current paradigm. how i see it is, nationalism and democracy does not assimilate well, well, as least the mixture suck, it is like a terrible cocktail, it is redundant- it taste horrible, it’s like a cheap way to make curry. Nationalism is like representative identity, a phantom glue to glue people together under one label, and not everyone will stick. and not everyone will function in it’s democratic process.

for democracy to work, or assimilate in our social-political process, the developed and developing world has to destroy the current paradigm of thought. Reevaluate principles, localized issues, acknowledge centuries of human ignorance and arrogance, acknowledge collective responsibility for the past present and future. Realizing despotism is necessary for democracy; (it’s a strong statement huh?) realizing every individual is a despot of the “self”?? ….. whoaoo… let me, i shall continue….

One thought on “Autonomy and Democracy (part 1?)

  1. “nationalism and democracy does not assimilate well, well, as least the mixture suck, it is like a terrible cocktail, it is redundant- it taste horrible, it’s like a cheap way to make curry”

    i am totally agree with you 😉
    there is no such thing. I dont ‘see’ Malaysia as a democratic country as well..

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s