| Many of us watched the protests at the 2001 Summit of the Americas in Quebec City in confusion. In our democratic country, we asked, aren’t there better ways to get the point across? The media, for the most part, dangled this question in front of us by airing interviews with protesters who couldn’t elucidate the goals behind their presence and experts who characterized the protests as the product of utopian dreamers. The collective outcry against a globalization movement that lacks a social and environmental framework was lost amidst the taboo of mass protests in our democratic country.
Across the world and four years later, mass protests reign in Ukraine. Since the recent November election, thousands of supporters of candidate Viktor Yushchenko have flooded Kiev’s Independence Square in protest of what they believe was a rigged election in favour of Viktor Yanukovich. And, in contrast to our reactions to the Quebec City protests, Ukrainians have embraced their protesters with a sense of duty. Three-and-a-half-tonnes of bread and much more than that in clothing have been donated to sustain the protesters who are bearing the bitter cold with chants of "They won’t take our freedom."
Far away from any similar threat, Calgarians have been busy with their own elections. Our opinions have been invited to the ballot box three times this year. Many of us politely declined the invite to fill our dance cards with the democratic shuffle, evidenced by record-low voter turnouts for our federal, provincial and municipal elections.
Not that voting is the only manner in which we exercise democracy. As demonstrated in Quebec City, some have eschewed voting for other means of democratic action. But for the rest of us, if we aren’t voting, and we’re not protesting, how are we in any way connected to democracy? Why does a lack of democracy in Ukraine provoke mass protests, but here is of little concern to us? And even when small victories advance the state of our democracy, as was accomplished at the 2001 Summit of the Americas, most of us sit by in bewilderment. Our situation is tragically indicative of a larger trend, one of a worldwide disconnect with democracy.
Democracy originated in ancient Greece as an alternative to governments controlled by a single class, select group or single person. It is embraced today around the world as a philosophy that secures the right of and offers the capacity to citizens to control their institutions for their own purposes, either directly or through representatives.
Alberta boasts a democratic system that is more theory than practice. When the Alberta legislature is in session, the Tories continually sidestep democracy by the use of closure to shut down debate. Closure minimizes both the ability of democratic representatives to voice their constituents’ concerns on a bill and the potential to consider policy alternatives. Since being elected in 1993, Premier Ralph Klein’s government has used closure 32 times – a staggering number when you consider that in the entire 14 years of the Lougheed administration (1971-1985), closure was used only once. Closure has been used to end debate and prematurely move forward bills on controversial issues such as private, for-profit hospitals and the inclusion of sexual orientation in the category of banned discrimination.
Perhaps most telling of Klein’s thoughts on democracy are his remarks earlier this year on Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet. By claiming that the socialist reforms of democratically elected Chilean president Salvador Allende forced Pinochet to mount his coup d’état, Klein confirmed his contempt for democracy. His blatant prioritization of ideology over democracy was a sad day for the many who sacrificed their lives in the name of democracy.
Alberta isn’t alone in its disengagement from democratic practice. This past September in Russia, following the school attack in Beslan by Chechen rebels that saw over 300 people killed, Russian President Vladimir Putin unveiled a plan to dissuade terrorism through centralizing political power. Housed within the plan were reforms to allow Putin to nominate regional governors himself and changes to the electoral system that could hamper the rise of a strong parliamentary opposition. Following this announcement, 100 world figures, from former presidents to intellectuals, signed a petition criticizing Putin for using the incident in Beslan to undermine democracy.
Even the United States got into it. "As governments fight the enemies of democracy, they must uphold the principles of democracy," George W. Bush warned Putin. Big words from a president who has himself been circumventing democratic rights in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks against the United States; both through the creation of the Patriot Act, which violates the civil liberties of American citizens and the hundreds of detainees that have been held at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba for more than two years with no trial.
Democracy’s a big word for Bush. He won a second term in power after a tense election that saw the results hinge on the outcome of voting in the state of Ohio. Four weeks later, residents of Ohio are taking inspiration from the democratically righteous in Ukraine. Motivated by voting irregularities, such as precincts that recorded more votes than registered voters; a shortage of voting machines in traditionally Democratic precincts, causing lineups in excess of eight hours for those more likely to vote for John Kerry while traditionally Republican precincts reported a surplus of voting machines; and the continued delay in counting the provisional ballots, citizens of Ohio recently took to the streets to demand another election in the name of democracy.
Yet these flaws haven’t stopped the United States from force-feeding its own brand of democracy to countries around the world. In January 2005, democratic elections are scheduled to take place in Iraq. Rather than aim to embody democracy in this landmark election, the Bush administration has been suggesting of late that not every town or city in Iraq needs to participate. "Let’s say you tried to have an election," asked U.S. Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld recently, "and you could have it in three-quarters or four-fifths of the country. But in some places you couldn’t because the violence was too great. Well, so be it. Nothing’s perfect in life, so you have an election that’s not quite perfect." And so goes the version of democracy that is being fed to the people of Iraq, one that echoes the demise in the practice of democracy around the world.
Perhaps this demise explains the world’s fascination with the situation in Ukraine. As this fledgling democracy tests its wings, it gives hope to the many who have only ever experienced democracy in theory. |
Copyright ©2004 FFWD. All rights reserved.