...the 5th of November, that's how V for Vendetta starts off. It's one of my favorites, mostly for philosophy above anything else. The movie makes one very interesting point though, that an idea is bulletproof. After looking at the state of politics these days, I'm starting to believe that even an idea isn't immune to rusting.
Let me start by talking about another movie that I saw very recently, Lincoln. It's a Spielberg movie based on his biography (which now goes on to my ever increasing to-read list). It's after watching it that I remembered V for Vendetta once again. For those of you who might not know, Lincoln is one of the more revered American presidents, for a number of things, biggest of which was abolishing slavery. That's one hell of an accomplishment, but the story of how it was managed and what it took from the man makes it even more poignant. Passion like that made me wonder why politics seems so different these days. Except that I realized politics hasn't changed, Lincoln faced serious opposition to pass his law. The law that seems so self-evident was abhorred by much of the Parliament then, much like some of the recent laws. Which makes it seem like there aren't any big problems these days, or maybe it's hindsight that makes a problem seem great. The bigger problem is the apparent lack of faith in democracy overall. Every little thing is so heavily contested, opinions are so fractured that it makes democracy seem like an exercise in pain that'd make a colonoscopy seem pleasant.
Which brings us to the main point, why the hell is that the case? History seems to make the case that people haven't changed much, something else should be the problem. A more likely cause are the circumstances. In Lincoln's time, democracy was a gift, independence had just been won, and the generation that fought for it was still fresh in everyone's memory. So the people knew what was at stake, they knew what democracy was better than. On the contrary, the current generation has grown up in an era where democracy is assumed. In most of the western world, freedoms are assumed, and the concept of a time and place where autocratic rulers made arbitrary rules is very foreign. Don't get me wrong, but to people whom freedom is given without any costs, it seems vanilla. To others who haven't grown up with it, it isn't. Just to be clear, I'm not in the latter category either, the world I grew up in had all kinds of freedoms, which is why I react strongly to any loss of freedoms. But I come from a country which obtained its freedom much more recently than the USA, and as a consequence, holds its democracy a little dearer. Not that that means things aren't messed up with it, but that a whole other story. There's a saying that complacency breeds contempt, and it seems particularly appropriate in this situation. Because democracy has been around for so long people treat it with a certain level of contempt, and expect it to do things for them, rather than the other way around.
Winston Churchill famously said "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time". For all the chest beating we might do about it, we tend to forget that it requires a lot of compromise. The problem is that unless you know what the alternative is, it's hard to get the adequate motivation to compromise. Which makes me think that democracy as a form of government is reaching a stable state, i.e. the changes in it's existence, shape and form are done. The problem with forms of government is that people get bored with them once they reach stability. Cause all the rhetoric about how they can be glorious stops and people have to see the flawed reality. And the problem about seeing flawed realities is that then people start to look for the next glorious form of government that can work, and revolution starts. The one thing democracy has going for it is that there isn't a viable alternative yet, but the descent to anarchy seems quite close, especially if you see some of the stuff on news networks in USA. Whether that happens remains to be seen, but I jolly well hope not. Till then I suggest you learn more about Lincoln, and even Kennedy and ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.
Let me start by talking about another movie that I saw very recently, Lincoln. It's a Spielberg movie based on his biography (which now goes on to my ever increasing to-read list). It's after watching it that I remembered V for Vendetta once again. For those of you who might not know, Lincoln is one of the more revered American presidents, for a number of things, biggest of which was abolishing slavery. That's one hell of an accomplishment, but the story of how it was managed and what it took from the man makes it even more poignant. Passion like that made me wonder why politics seems so different these days. Except that I realized politics hasn't changed, Lincoln faced serious opposition to pass his law. The law that seems so self-evident was abhorred by much of the Parliament then, much like some of the recent laws. Which makes it seem like there aren't any big problems these days, or maybe it's hindsight that makes a problem seem great. The bigger problem is the apparent lack of faith in democracy overall. Every little thing is so heavily contested, opinions are so fractured that it makes democracy seem like an exercise in pain that'd make a colonoscopy seem pleasant.
Which brings us to the main point, why the hell is that the case? History seems to make the case that people haven't changed much, something else should be the problem. A more likely cause are the circumstances. In Lincoln's time, democracy was a gift, independence had just been won, and the generation that fought for it was still fresh in everyone's memory. So the people knew what was at stake, they knew what democracy was better than. On the contrary, the current generation has grown up in an era where democracy is assumed. In most of the western world, freedoms are assumed, and the concept of a time and place where autocratic rulers made arbitrary rules is very foreign. Don't get me wrong, but to people whom freedom is given without any costs, it seems vanilla. To others who haven't grown up with it, it isn't. Just to be clear, I'm not in the latter category either, the world I grew up in had all kinds of freedoms, which is why I react strongly to any loss of freedoms. But I come from a country which obtained its freedom much more recently than the USA, and as a consequence, holds its democracy a little dearer. Not that that means things aren't messed up with it, but that a whole other story. There's a saying that complacency breeds contempt, and it seems particularly appropriate in this situation. Because democracy has been around for so long people treat it with a certain level of contempt, and expect it to do things for them, rather than the other way around.
Winston Churchill famously said "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time". For all the chest beating we might do about it, we tend to forget that it requires a lot of compromise. The problem is that unless you know what the alternative is, it's hard to get the adequate motivation to compromise. Which makes me think that democracy as a form of government is reaching a stable state, i.e. the changes in it's existence, shape and form are done. The problem with forms of government is that people get bored with them once they reach stability. Cause all the rhetoric about how they can be glorious stops and people have to see the flawed reality. And the problem about seeing flawed realities is that then people start to look for the next glorious form of government that can work, and revolution starts. The one thing democracy has going for it is that there isn't a viable alternative yet, but the descent to anarchy seems quite close, especially if you see some of the stuff on news networks in USA. Whether that happens remains to be seen, but I jolly well hope not. Till then I suggest you learn more about Lincoln, and even Kennedy and ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.
Posts
