Colonial Hong Kong in the Eyes of Elsie Tu

29. Democracy Misinterpreted

29 Democracy Misinterpreted L ike all traditional philosophies, religions and systems throughou t history, the concept of democracy has changed with the times. It no longer gives power to the people except in theory. Maybe its real name should b e 'capitalis m i n democrati c clothing ' o r mayb e 'laissez-fair e fo r superpowers'. No one, myself included, would oppose true democracy, provided a new system could be devised whereby the people have a say in their government, and no t jus t a meaningles s vote . Histor y indicate s tha t n o matte r wha t system has existed in the past, it is always the ambitious, the greedy and the strong, who ultimately find a way to lord it over those who play by the rules. In Darwinian biological terms it is the survival of the fittest. On the political scene, it is often th e survival in power of the unscrupulous, the rich, or the corrupt. I am not arrogant enough to claim to have a way to provide a political Utopia, nor do I imagine that I have a perfect system to replace the decadent Western system of democracy. One-person-one-vote provides a political lie because no matter how one uses that vote, everything remains more or less unchanged. Elections are held, so it seems, to give a different party a chance to occupy the highest offices i n the government. Ostensibly elections ar e supposed to allow voters to change to a new government's policies if they are dissatisfie d wit h presen t policies . Fo r suc h scan t result s tha t ca n b e 214 Colonial Hong Kong in the Eyes of Elsie Tu achieved, elections are expensive, disruptive, and time wasting. In fact, i n some countrie s lik e th e Unite d State s an d Britain , a newl y electe d government represents only a minority of the electorate. I shall clarify tha t point in a later chapter . Like Fidel Castro, quoted earlier, I believe that the whole trend of what goes for democracy today is a fraud. A totally new system of government is necessary o n a worldwid e scale , indeed , a ne w politica l philosophy . W e have listened too long to views like Winston Churchill's, that 'democrac y is the 'worst ' for m o f government excep t al l thos e others' , an d w e hav e been content to let that suffice. I t has developed into the worst of systems because it is no longer truly democratic. I shall begin by quoting some genuinely concerned academic s whos e motives cannot be questioned. Arnold Toynbee, a world famous historian , speaking of the 'great American democracy' said in 1961: America is today the leaderof the world anti-revolutionary movement in the defence o f vested interests. She now stands for what Rome stood for. Rome consistently supported the rich against the poor in all foreign communities that fell under her sway,- and since the poor, so far, have always and everywhere been far more numerous than the rich, Rome's policy made for inequality , fo r injustice , an d for th e least happiness of the greatest number. Forty year s afte r Toynbe e wrot e thes e words , th e situatio n ha s furthe r deteriorated, not only for many Americans, but also for the poor worldwide in those countries that have been forced to make unequal trade agreements, or been offere d loan s for developmen t b y the American-led Worl d Ban k and International Monetar y Fund, development tha t has profited th e fe w but lai d heav y debt s o n th e poor , a s well a s displacing man y fro m thei r farmlands an d deprivin g the m o f thei r traditiona l mean s o f makin g a livelihood. In a UNICEF report published i n the current year, 2000, we are tol d that the United Nations Assembly set a target of 0.7 percent of gross national product to be donated by developed countries to developing countries. Only Norway, Sweden , Denmar k an d th e Netherlands hav e met , o r exceeded , Democracy Misinterpreted 215 that target figure. At the bottom of...