Posted by
Curt Day on Monday, March 02, 2009 2:02:36 PM
How many times have we heard Conservatives proudly proclaim to be believers in both limited government and democracy. These same conservatives also rage against "unelected" judges while they praise those, in the private sector, who know how to create jobs. But their ranting and praising is nothing more than a slight of hand.
Though the Conservatives' ranting against appointed judges, however selective, can be consistent with their profession to believe in democracy, their empowering of the private sector while trying to reign in the government can easily contradict democracy. That is because the empowering of the private sector is selective, not egalitarian. And their limiting of government results in tying the hands of those who are elected to represent the people.
It is odd that what we consider to be the ultimate proof of our freedom, which is voting for our government, puts those in power whose rule and influence must be minimized because of their inclination for evil and corruption. This assumes that members of government can only be interested in promoting themselves. In actuality, members of government can promote the interests of others too. We find that members of government can also represent the financial elite of a country. This was Smedley Butler's argument against war and interventionism (see. American Military Interventionism and War Is A Racket ).
There is a third group that members of government.can represent. That group is the people who elected the government. That is, that the government represent and protect the people not just against foreign enemies, but against those who would abuse their fellow citizens. The history of workers' rights in America testifies to the need for such a government. In addition, we need environmental protection and consumer protection. When any group calls to limit an elected government's right to protect its people, that group cannot honestly claim to be advancing democracy.
Whether a government represents the people who elected it depends, in part, on the people. We often hear the quote "the price of freedom is vigilance." If government is to represent us, we must be active in government. We must never be shy to make our views known and we must not be not be reluctant to press our demands. Certainly, if we are to get government to represent its people, its people must be willing to engage in activism on a regular basis. But activism alone will not ensure that government will represent its people. The voters must let candidates know that their vote must be earned rather than be a guarantee. That means that voters will have to be willing to vote for candidates from other than a favorite party. In America, voters must be willing to vote for 3rd party candidates if they are to elect a truly representative government.
Thus, the issue that stands before us is not the size of the government but how representative it is. A government that acts to represent its peopl,e rather than selective sectors or themselves, practices democracy. Tying the hands of such a government attacks democracy. Conservatives attack democracy when they assume that at best, government is a necessary evil and thus insist on a limited government. Limiting the government then would hinder it from protecting the general population from individual sectors that would attack them. One cannot both advance democracy and hinder those who are elected from doing their job.