A characteristic of Western, especially Anglo-American, politics is the relatively strong tendency to regulate other cultural and state arrangements. In the past, military and economic power was primarily used, but in recent decades, so-called soft power has been employed, which uses methods of psychological violence and influencing public opinion. In order to achieve its goals, Western politics manipulates through the media, even public ones, and through civil society organizations. It has been proven that it resorts to half-truths and lies, duplicity, opportunism, and manipulation. A case in point is the COVID-19 pandemic, when many Western governments made decisions that favored pharmaceutical corporations, while ordinary citizens suffered from lockdowns and economic troubles. These practices are not isolated incidents but systematic patterns that point to a deeper moral crisis in Western democracy. Under the guise of democracy and the rule of law, decisions are made that violate their own rules—from the theft of foreign property to political censorship and economic sanctions that serve only their elites.
- Lies and Manipulations: The 2003 invasion of Iraq was based on a lie about weapons of mass destruction, a claim that Western politicians only admitted years later, after the devastating war. This invasion caused the destabilization of the entire region, led to the rise of ISIS, and cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of innocent people. Similarly, the media has one-sidedly portrayed the war in Ukraine, ignored NATO’s and Ukraine’s political roles before 2022, and demonized any opposing views.
- Duplicity and Opportunism: Western countries claim to advocate for the sovereignty of nations, yet they attacked Yugoslavia, supported illegal regime changes in Libya, Syria, Venezuela, and elsewhere, while simultaneously talking about the “inviolability of borders” in Ukraine.
- Theft of Foreign Property: The freezing of 300 billion dollars of Russian state reserves without legal grounds is a clear example of how the West violates its own rules. Similarly, the U.S. seized Venezuela’s oil company CITGO and Afghanistan’s state money, which should have gone to its people.
- Political Censorship and Limiting Freedom of Speech: Independent journalists and researchers, such as Seymour Hersh and Julian Assange, have been silenced or persecuted for exposing the truth about American and European war crimes. Meanwhile, social media under government control blocked content that did not align with official policies, such as criticism of COVID measures or alternative views on the war in Ukraine.
- Economic Sanctions as a Tool for Political Pressure: The U.S. and the EU have sanctioned individuals and companies without judicial decisions, without proving their guilt. They also banned Huawei and TikTok under the pretext of security, but in reality, because of economic competition.
However, this cannot be attributed to all people in the West— the problem is not with them, but with the failure of classical parliamentary democracy, which has lost its legitimacy. The likely cause is that with the development of democracy without corrective mechanisms, politics concentrates around people with specific traits and values that no longer reflect the public image but primarily serve personal interests and benefits, both material and emotional. Parliamentary democracy no longer works in the interest of citizens, but in the interest of political and corporate networks that control information, capital, and laws. Empirical data supports this claim: numerous studies (e.g., How the National Association of Manufacturers Shaped American Capitalism, Delton et al., 2020) show that political systems without effective oversight (e.g., media independence, judicial control) allow power to accumulate in the hands of people with high ambition, low empathy, and a tendency to exploit systems. The key problem is not democracy itself but the lack of mechanisms that prevent the abuse of power, as elites have subordinated the judiciary and media. Their “ability” is based on psychological and psychosocial characteristics of politicians, such as:
- The Dark Triad of Traits
Narcissism: A need for admiration, grandiosity. Example: Narcissistic leaders like Silvio Berlusconi, Donald Trump, and others often make decisions that serve their public image, not the long-term interests of the country.
Machiavellianism: Manipulativeness, the ends justify the means. Example: Vladimir Putin uses disinformation and censorship to maintain power, even though this harms democratic processes.
Psychopathic traits: Lack of empathy, impulsivity. Example: Rodrigo Duterte encouraged extrajudicial killings in the drug war in the Philippines, reflecting a disregard for human rights. - High Extraversion and Charisma
Charismatic politicians attract support with emotional speeches, but often neglect long-term solutions. For instance, tax cuts under Trump led to a short-term economic boost but increased national debt and deepened social inequalities in the long run. Hugo Chávez gained public support with rhetorical skills, but his economic policies led Venezuela to hyperinflation. These decisions lead to societal polarization and reduce trust in political institutions. - Risk-Taking and Pathological Competitiveness
Politicians often make risky decisions for quick political gains. Example: Boris Johnson’s optimistic rhetoric about a “quick victory” in Brexit garnered support for leaving the EU, despite uncertain consequences. - Self-Assurance and Selfishness as Values
Focus on personal success, status, and material gain. Example: Silvio Berlusconi skilfully used his media empire to strengthen his political influence during his time as Prime Minister of Italy.
The impact of these characteristics on political behaviour is disastrous and manifests in several ways:
- Short-Term Politics: Narcissistic leaders prioritize quick wins (e.g., tax cuts to attract voters) over systemic reforms.
- Corruption and Nepotism: Machiavellian actors exploit positions for personal gain. Example: Jacob Zuma in South Africa was accused of manipulating state contracts for the benefit of his allies.
- Polarization and War: Charismatic leaders often promote a “us versus them” division to solidify their base. Example: Those opposing the war in Ukraine are framed as supporting Putin’s Russian policies (orchestrated communication from Biden, Von der Leyen, and other leaders).
We could list more examples, but the more important mechanisms are those that prevent the concentration of such traits in politics. The foundation is a strong judiciary and media, both of which are already strongly influenced by these quasi-elites. The following mechanism is term limits. In political systems, they prevent the accumulation of power over multiple terms. The third is the transparency of political party funding and restrictions on private capital and individuals, especially foreign actors and intelligence services.
All of these mechanisms have proven to be insufficient. Despite the fact that the vast majority of people in Western countries oppose wars, corporate lobbying, and unjust economic practices, politics does not change because decisions are in the hands of a handful of people who are not accountable to voters but to the financiers of their campaigns. It is essential to increase oversight over politicians, evaluate them, and actively replace them.
The most appropriate remaining solution is direct democracy, where people decide on key issues themselves—without intermediaries, without corruption, and without manipulation. Only with a system that allows direct expression of citizens’ will and oversight of implementation can we restore true democracy and prevent the abuse of power. Direct democracy as a solution is demonstrated in good practices such as the Swiss referendum model, which proves that people can directly decide on key issues, with fewer opportunities for politicians to manipulate them. Digital platforms can enable transparent and secure voting on all important state decisions, which would eliminate corruption and abuse of power.
Without direct democracy, elites will continue to exploit lies, manipulation, and repression to maintain their power. It is time for people to take control of democracy and have the final word. Direct democracy would help eliminate many systemic problems of parliamentary democracy, which has become ineffective, corrupt, and detached from the will of the people. Here are the key problematic aspects and how direct democracy could solve them:
- Corruption and Lobbyist Influence
Problem:- Politicians are not dependent on voters but on corporations, lobbyists, or even foreign states that finance their campaigns.
- Decisions often benefit capital, not the public interest (e.g., economic and arms lobbies influence legislation).
- “Revolving door” – politicians get well-paid jobs in companies they previously regulated.
Solution: Direct democracy allows people to decide on laws and reforms, limiting the influence of lobbyists. Financing politicians would become largely unnecessary, as decisions would be made by voters.
- Lack of Political Accountability
Problem:- Politicians promise one thing but do another, knowing they cannot be directly recalled before their term ends.
- Voting once every 4 or 5 years does not allow for effective oversight of political decisions.
Solution: Direct democracy would allow for the recall of politicians (recall vote) if the majority of people find they are not fulfilling their promises. Regular referendums on key laws would allow people to directly decide on controversial issues.
3. Partocracy and Professional Politicians
Problem:
- Parties have a monopoly over the political system and exclude individuals who would truly represent the people.
- Politics has become a profession where the same people change positions in power for decades without facing the consequences of poor decisions.
Solution: Direct democracy would replace professional politicians, with citizens deciding on laws with the help of experts who present different arguments. Limiting terms would prevent the creation of political elites.
4. Media Manipulation and One-Sided Propaganda
Problem:
- Most major media outlets are controlled by political or economic elites who steer public opinion in a one-sided direction.
- Important information is hidden or selectively presented to influence election outcomes.
Solution: More direct participation would require people to be better informed about facts, not just party and corporate propaganda. A system of open information would ensure a balanced presentation of all arguments before voting.
5. Centralization of Power and Politicians’ Alienation from the People
Problem:
- Decisions are made within small circles of political elites, far from the needs of local populations.
- Centralized power causes inefficiency and ignores regional specifics.
Solution: Decentralization of decision-making – people could decide on budgets, laws, and projects at the local level, with greater transparency of decisions – everyone would have the opportunity to influence key reforms.
6. Inefficiency and Slowness of Decision-Making
Problem:
- Parliamentary democracy often blocks reforms because different parties cannot agree or because lobbyists influence legislation.
- Many beneficial initiatives are rejected because they do not align with the interests of the ruling parties.
Solution: Faster decision-making – referendums and e-voting would allow people to directly decide without long political games and less bureaucracy – instead of unnecessary political debates, laws would be more professionally based and in line with the will of the people.
7. Illusion of Choice and Election Manipulation
Problem:
- People vote between parties that are often very similar, meaning they don’t actually have a real choice.
- Elections often do not reflect the true will of the people due to campaign funding systems, electoral rules, and manipulations.
Solution: Direct choice – people would not be limited to political parties, but could directly decide on issues that concern them, leading to more representative decisions – instead of political deals, every vote would be equal.
Conclusion: Parliamentary democracy no longer works in the interest of the people but rather in the interest of political elites, corporations, and media monopolies. The people are cut off from actual decision-making, and the system is becoming more inefficient and manipulated. Direct democracy and oversight would allow people to make decisions about their future without intermediaries, bringing greater responsibility, transparency, and fairness. The Swiss model and new digital platforms show that such a system is possible and effective.
It is time to demand true democracy – one where people have the power to make decisions in their hands.
Direct Democracy: Advantages and Challenges
Advantages:
- A more just and effective way of decision-making that returns power to the people.
- Enhances accountability and transparency in governance.
Challenges and Solutions:
- Lack of Expertise in Decision-Making
- People may lack the necessary knowledge or access to information to make complex political and economic decisions.
- Solution: Provide expert support and informed debates before voting. Introduce citizens’ councils where experts present various arguments, and citizens vote based on balanced information.
- Risk of Manipulation of Public Opinion
- Strong media lobbies and social networks can influence people and guide decision-making based on false or biased information.
- Solution: Implement strict transparency requirements for information before voting. Establish fact-checking systems executed by independent experts from different fields.
- Slowness of Decision-Making in Urgent Situations
- Direct democracy may slow down decision-making during crises, such as pandemics, wars, or economic crises.
- Solution: Define emergency procedures where elected bodies temporarily decide, but measures must be subsequently approved through a referendum.
- Risk of Majority Tyranny
- The majority may make decisions harmful to minorities or specific groups.
- Solution: Constitutionally protect fundamental human rights that the majority cannot curtail. Introduce a dual decision-making system where sensitive topics also require support from minority groups.
- Lack of Interest or Poor Participation
- People may not participate in voting because they are not interested in politics or believe their vote does not matter.
- Solution: Introduce a combination of mandatory and non-mandatory referendums – participation would be mandatory for key issues.
- Difficulties in Formulating Complex Laws
- Some legislation requires precise wording that voters may struggle to form on their own.
- Solution: Legislative proposals should be prepared in collaboration with legal experts and professionals. Introduce a two-phase voting system – first on the concept, then on the final draft of the law.
- Direct Democracy May Not Be Suitable for All Issues
- Some technical issues (e.g., monetary policy, complex international treaties) are too complicated for direct decision-making by all citizens.
- Solution: Clearly define which issues are suitable for direct decision-making and which remain in the hands of experts.
In conclusion, direct democracy is not perfect and requires careful planning to address its weaknesses. The key to success lies in: A combination of direct and consultative democracy with strong voter oversight, using digital technologies for speed and efficiency, protection against manipulations and ensuring balanced information as well as safeguarding fundamental rights and including minority voices
When properly designed, direct democracy can become the most just and effective way of decision-making, returning power to the people and ensuring the quality and competitiveness of communities. Together, and with the help of the Libertas Europa platform, we can make a significant contribution to improving democracy and the quality of life. “Join the Libertas Europa movement and together let’s create a Europe where every vote counts, and democracy is not just a word but an everyday reality.”
Author:
Gorazd Hladnik,
Libertas Europa
Submit your review | |
