The strength of democracy

Submitted by Lindsay
Melbourne Australia!

Laughter – the most civilised music in the world
 - Peter Ustinov, 1977

(6/2021) Let me begin by asking you a question: What is the one thing that people in dictatorships cannot do?

Having thought about that for a couple of seconds, let me add a clue: It is something everyone in a democracy does. Yes? Well, what we do and they can’t, is laugh. People in democracies know they have the freedom to at least do that. Citizens in dictatorships dare not, and, if it becomes the way things have been for generations, they will lose the ability to do so.

No matter the disadvantages of the society, the hardships and corruption, those that live in democracies retain that freedom, the desire and ability to laugh.

But dictators do not laugh. They cannot be seen as having feelings of kindness or tolerance, because their power is dependent on total obedience; they know their way is the only way. Think about it: Lenin was aware of the peasant’s plights – did he smile in sympathy? Joseph Stalin was not known for his jokes, Mao for his kindness, Kim Jon-un for his care? No, they were not.

In Russia’s case there were good reasons for the revolt that led to Lenin and Stalin, and that revolution had merit, except for one thing: One person in charge has absolute power. The citizens had had centuries of deprivation, but were used to it, and had a kind of freedom, but when Lenin took over that was lost. The only way to express their feelings were by subtlety and black humour. The best examples are Shostakovich and Solzhenitsyn, as art will never die, but terror still came to rule.

The greatest sadness is that the work of the American Relief Administration was stopped, the one chance Russia had of seeing the benefits of Democracy. And, even more importantly, the chance for America to learn that helping others without expecting profit, indeed at considerable cost, would actually make them great in the eyes of the world.

This now unknown organisation was begun by Herbert Hoover (surely the greatest statesman you have ever had) in 1919, and some 300 hundred young American men who volunteered so that the shocking plight of most of the population could be alleviated. Although Lenin took the credit, he was furious that it was undermining his authority and stopped it. I’d recommend you read the book, ‘The Russian Job’ by Douglas Smith to see the results – for both countries.

China is a vastly different case. It has been ruled by emperors since the dawn of history, men whose word was law, so citizens had a built-in fear of seeming to ridicule their leaders; even so, they have still retained their own way of expressing the need for a laugh. Xi Jinping has done what Lenin did not – brought millions out of poverty, and turned his country into a commercial success. Most citizens seem happy with this, and although repression and re-education is in force, the aim of making the country a unified one is going ahead.

The difference is fundamental: Although both were or are dictators, Lenin put his own values ahead of the citizenry, Jinping puts his country first; actually, he puts his kingdom first

*

Democracy has come in for a lot of criticism in recent years, as it seemed to be failing in its goal, of giving the ‘Dems’ their ‘Government’, which is not surprising, as over the years the idea has been diluted, whittled away until it had become a phantom. It is not hard to see the reason for this: Right-wing economists, writers and politicians such as Milton Freedman, Ayn Rand and Ronald Reagan touted small government, free trade, and low tax, which became known as the ‘trickle down’ effect. They got their way, and disaster was introduced – financial collapses, for instance in 1987, 1989, 2007, destroyed the lives of many ordinary people, but hardly touched those responsible.

It couldn’t last, so when Barak Obama became president, the astonishment was enormous. The far right ‘knew’ the result had been rigged, because the electors were happy with the status quo, and turned to the one person they thought would restore their prestige, the King of Trumps.

How wrong they were. They had forgotten that America was a democracy where the people ruled. And the people are not stupid. Yes, they had trusted the administrations, had believed the press, and were swayed by social media, but they were also diverse, and diversity means the flow of ideas that are not proscribed or bound by rules, which is the opposite of dictatorship.

The greatest contrast between a Democracy and a tyranny is, surprising, cultural. It is the most cherished activity of the free: Laughter. Dictatorships are glum affairs, fear-curbing action, laughter a sign of revision.

So it is, for instance, hard for most Chinese to let go and belly laugh. Jokes are strange, and irony the only thing appreciated as they have used it as a release all their lives. Dictators don’t understand irony, and their humour comes from seeing dissidents eliminated.

Russians are much the same, the laugh is maniacal, the joke made is a risk too far. Hitler couldn’t laugh, not could Trump. That is not to say they do not appreciate nature, beauty, or art, but only that which pleases them. Anything else is subversive.

Laughter is the mark of communities who have been free from the yoke of conformity for most of their development, who are not afraid to lampoon their leaders, who can tell the truth as they see it without being imprisoned.

Of course, ‘laughter’ is a metaphor for happiness, and happiness comes from the ability to create. Thus, great nations are those that have progressed, changed, sought the future and although often turned aside from such pursuits, they always look forward to the new.

So a great nation is one that is free to make their own art, music, science or literature. And creation comes from the freedom to think sideways, to cherish nonconformity, and to be encouraged by leadership to get going.

This is the true worth of Joe Biden’s leadership. The freedom to create by the people for the people. Being happy and laughing at the outcomes.