NawaMan's Blog

Democracy and the Country well being — What do you choose?

Supposedly the first should lead to the later, right? Well, mostly but not always. It will if most of the people in the country also looks at the bigger picture and not only self interest. It will if most of the people pay attentions to what the government is doing, give them proper pressure and reject bad behaviors such as corruptions.

What would you do if the first does not leads to the others? I know democracy elected does not guarantee efficiency. Democracy elected governments are still humans and humans are imperfect. Having more people helps selecting and directing them should at least bring the best. I know that and agree completely. Indeed, that is the whole point of democracy. So there is no point to argue that.

What I am really asking is what if the government exploit people’s self interests to gain popularity (or ever loyalty) and exploit people’s ignorant to allows its corruptions, if you happen to know that what will you do? Should you let go when the government giving away free or almost free (very low interest) either in the form of unmanaged social programs or actual money; and, at the same time spent government money on projects that profit mostly to the ruling party leader’s companies and families? Will you stay still and watch your country money drained dry just for the spirit of democracy?

OK, some of you may go out or shout out giving the government pressure asking for better behaviors or an investigations, a democracy way. But what if the government does not want an investigation and dissolve the parliament knowing how much popularity they have. In the system that a legitimate investigation to a government can only happen in parliament, the government can simply escape making those accusations to become just rumors or self-justified wrong doing. Sure, go out on the street asking for the truth and not a quick escape. What if the government still insist on the new election, sure, let ban the election.

What if the government still insist on the new election (now a one-party election) and win (even with all the opposite parties and hundreds of thousands on the street protesting); sure, let go on the street again. What if the government still does not care saying that they are come to power by popularity and those accusations are just rumors (therefore, no need for an investigation).

Their majority in the parliament ensure that every vote wins. More, thanks you the party leader who is a billionaire, the government have well controls over the media – some of which by as the government and many via cooperation (as the party leader directly owns them). The media eventually split into two sides where both present completely different aspects of the same news, of course, with some degree of bias (think Fox News), causing the sided population even more sided and those that were ignorant even more ignorant (be cause they cannot make sense of those news). Even non-sided media were seen by both as sided to the other side (so many “side”s :p). What will you do still? Sure, keep protesting. The government? Keep ignoring (as so the world).

At one point of the standing-still country, an undemocratic thing happens – a coup d’état. Sure and never more sure, it is undemocratic but at least the government was finally down. A committee was set up to gather evidents of the wrong doing (NO JUDGING JUST GATHER EVIDENTS). Some of the accusations turns out to be false but many holds some water. A law suit was fired against the previous government about some wrong doing during the unopposed election resulting in the dissolve of the party and the ban of party executive members for five years. A new constitution is drafted adding more tough codes and fixing those previously exploited and eventually brought the whole country to stand still. It later put to vote by every voters and accepted. Then an election was called. The air still dirty but at least we can breath. NOTE: the coup team DOES NOT join the election.

What happen next was a win (again) to the party which publicly say that they are proxy of the previous government claiming that all those free money would still flow if you vote them. During their later seven-month-long governing, they do almost nothing but trying to change constitution in order to bring the previous party back and stop the corruption cases in the court. Even when the price of the country best exporting goods was very high, the government do almost nothing to takes that advantage. What people (who cares) can do? The same old thing, protest.

One corruption case turn out to be false but others result in 2-years in jail for the previous leader and 3-years for his wife. Many more cases still in the court. With helps of the proxy government and his billions, the leaders and his wife fleet abroad claiming unfair treatments. For his supporter, the court is corrupted or used by black power while his opposer argue that it’s true that the all the evidents against him are gathered by a committee set up by the coup but the case was challenged (by the ones of most expensive lawyers in the country) in the supreme court (which most members are members long before the coup); therefore, legitimate and valid.

The proxy leader was unexpectedly forced to resigned due to an unrelated (but by law) wrong doing. A new proxy leader was set up. This time even closer to the billionaire (brother-in-law thing). The attempt to hold on to power at any cost is clear to be seen. For his supporter, he (the formal leader – the billionaire) is god, can do no wrong (or forgivable) and representation of democracy. All court case against him are all false and the judges are completely bias. Even though they never say how bias (what evidents that are fake or what logics that are false), they just said that the judges are bias. For his opposer, he is evil, very corrupted politician, power hungry and many more bad things. His popularity are gained from populist policy and do more bad than good. In short, the country is divided – well, deeply divided – and still … stay still. So, what will you do?

So what will you do? Do you want democracy to flourish and accept if that means the country will die and deeply divided? Or Do you want the country to go forward in the better direction by demanding more from the politicians and by bringing corrupted politicians to justice even if those politicians are so popular. Should we accept popularity as indicator of right or wrong or should we accept the justice system? Is it good to let a leader that is deeply loved by haft and deeply hated by haft leading the country and let the country deeply divided (whether or not the love and the hate are for the right reasons)? Can a divided country go forward?

If – for some reason – you see that the current status of your country democracy does not lead to a well-being or evern bring in destruction of your country well-being, what well you do? Will you bend the democracy principle or accept the destruction for the democracy principle?

Nawa (saddy) Man.