subject: The Ideal society: Rule of God and direct democracy: referendums! Part IX [print this page] The Ideal society: Rule of God and direct democracy: referendums! Part IX
The Ideal society: Rule of the God and direct democracy: referendums! Part IX
Referendums versus one man rule:
The one man rule syndrome have dominated world societies ever the creation of societies. In the tribal system one man became the chief of the tribe deciding for his tribe all their affairs. He becomes dominant and an absolute dictator. Usually he is strongest person found in the tribe and have to win his position as chief by physical force.
This phenomenon is observed in all tribal systems. Strength of the chief is the way to his position of power. This phenomenon is observed among animals where we have the same phenomenon. The strong animal, be it a chimpanzee or a lion, must win his way to be at the head of the flock.
Hard battles are fought until the most powerful gets supremacy. In the human species we have the same thing happening. One person rises to dominate and control over the whole tribe. He has to work out his way and combat against other potential persons looking for the same thing, power and control. It would not be an exaggeration to assume the thing happening even in bigger societies that are fully fledged and well developed.
Political adversaries fight over the position of power in every society. Parties are formed now and are used a the legal and ideal vehicle reach the highest position. Party leaders go against one another in a civilized form and makes their battles to win over electors. Elections and universal suffrage replaces the physical combat among tribal chiefs, but the principle is one and the same in the tribe as well as in the highly developed superpower in our days.
The multi party system as well the two party system is but the means of the party chief to get to power. Republican against democratic, or labor against conservative, all are party structured and all lead their heads of parties to the position of power. Then elections takes over to offer legitimacy of rule and control.
It is all too easy but the one man rule remain as ever the same exact syndrome of dominance and control.
Referendums mean that the people decide. This is not a form of election where one person has the power by proxy to lead the people. Referendums stand in complete opposition to the one man rule, and to all institutions of rule and dominance.
Referendums mean the rule of the people. They do not delegate their power to anybody. No delegation of power means that the people keep the right and responsibility to rule themselves by themselves.
The one man rule, whether in a form of a president, king, secretary of party takes by force or legitimate means the power in his or her hands and rule according to his own personal wisdom.
This is not the case in direct democracies where all people come together to share in the decision making.
The one man ruler does not share with anyone decision making, he makes decisions himself and then forced his decisions on the people.
The distinction between the one man rule and the people's rule is sharing decision making between the totality of the people and not forsaking it to one person.
All power is not then invested in the person of the ruler, but it is equally distributed among he whole nation.
After all it is the people who ought to decide their lives and decide their destiny. The people know better than one person. The people have wisdom and justice in their decision while the one person ruler is most of the time if not all the time unjust and unwise. The whole people take in their account, by definition, the interest of the whole people, while one person cannot take into consideration the interest of the whole people.
