Democracy, dynasty

Systems in themselves do not matter much. Democracy is a widely-accepted, well-appreciated system of governance, though, by all accounts, it is not necessarily the only good form of governance. There, for instance, are examples of visionary leaders providing good governance, helping nations prosper, and keeping people happy, even as they do not explicitly follow the norms of democracy. On the other hand, many are the nations that follow the democratic system, but are failing to elect the right kind of leaders, failing to develop and prosper, and are keeping the people in misery and want.

The point to stress in respect of America, however, is that, while it is trying to promote the ideals of democracy around the world, why is it that it is drifting from the basic concepts of democracy itself? It’s common knowledge that the American democratic system is loaded heavily in favour of the rich, and not in favour of the people per se. Election after election there is proof of the sway of the money power of the candidates, and the lack of the voice of the underlings.

In a true democracy, it would seem ridiculous that a Bush should follow another Bush, and a Clinton another Clinton, with only periodic interruptions, or by turns. It cannot be that situations evolved that way; it’s simply that situations were sought to be created that way with the use and misuse of influence that derived directly from the presidential office, or White House, from time to time; and the halo derived thereof to one or other family or clan. Note also the potential fund-raising abilities the (former) presidential families carry with them, in order to gain acceptability from their respective parties for the candidature in the run-up to the presidential nominations and polls. It’s another matter that good souls like Jimmy Carter didn’t train their minds, or utilise their influence, that way.

Americans may be well advised to perfect their own system of democracy before they seek to spread it to the rest of the world.