| 
| These are regular editorials
produced alongside the corresponding issues on Nonviolent
News. |
Part 2: The role
of civil society
In the last issue’s Editorial we considered some of the
questions regarding voting systems and governmental accountability. In this
editorial we will look primarily at the role of civil society – but this
is both for its own sake, and for the relationship which it has, or should
have, to governmental structures.
‘Democracy’ is not possible without a vibrant civil
society which is made up of a variety of different sectors including trade
unions, community groups, voluntary groups, campaigning organisations and so
on. Indeed, when democracy is failing at a central, governmental level (as it
did in Northern Ireland) then these are the kinds of bodies which fill in with
both service and representational functions. In a divided society this is
especially important because otherwise there can be a total fracture in society
leading to brutal and violent conflict; the fact that the Troubles in Northern
Ireland did not descend to all out warfare can be attributed in a considerable
measure to the work of these bodies.
Without freedom to organise for such civil society
bodies, democracy is a sham even if it includes relatively free elections.
While ‘government’ may be considered the apex of the representational democracy
model, the power of governments is limited by a number of factors, including
the failure of electoral systems to represent people’s views, and these
limiting factors can act in a positive or a negative way depending on what
government is attempting to do. A healthy civil society is also an essential
for democracy and should not be considered an ‘also ran’ in the democratic
stakes; governments may ignore certain issues, or be relatively powerless to do
anything about others, e.g. according to the political and economic system, the
power over financial and multinational corporations may be limited, rightly or
wrongly. It is these groups who pick up on issues and run with them, garnering
support from the wider public where possible and attempting to influence
governments as well, perhaps, as dealing with issues directly; e.g. trade
unions act to both defend individual workers and to defend workers collectively
in the economic and political melee of society.
Civil society has the right to be listened to by
governments in a democracy. The extent to which governments actually listen and
respond is a good indicator of the health of a democracy. Governments make the
decisions at the highest level in the system, sometimes hard decisions, and
they have the buck stopping on their desks, but if sensible (both morally and
pragmatically to avoid later crises) they will pay attention to grass roots
opinion and, where possible, make adjustments. The fact that the Irish
government ploughed ahead with the planned route of motorway near Tara, and has
been unable to compromise over the gas pipeline route in Mayo, does not say
much for the listening and adaptability skills of certain politicians. In
Northern Ireland the laudable aim of getting rid of the iniquitous and unjust
“11+” exam has descended into complicated farce for a variety of reasons;
strong division on the issue (reflecting the religious/political divide to some
extent) is one factor but so is what would seem an inability to properly
involve all concerned in searching for suitable ways out of a shambolic brick
wall.
Pressure groups cannot always get their own way for a
variety of reasons including lack of resources. However governments tend to be
hidebound by both the limitations of their own political ideology and by taking
pragmatic, minimalist responses to the issues at hand. This is where civil
society comes in with vision, vision for a future which is different, which
cares, and which acts as a challenge to staid governmental models. Governments
tend to see the current situation and say, almost rhetorically, “What’s wrong
with that?”, and think about tweaking it, whereas civil society tends to look
at what’s wrong and ask how a better model can be implemented. In facing the
coming ecological crisis it is the latter model which is needed, apart from any
issues of social justice.
In the current situation, governments tend to want to
restore the ‘status quo ante’ the financial crisis, while pressure groups are
more likely to have a vision of what is needed. Financial constraints are
usually cited as reasons for inaction while what is required is designing what
needs to happen and then asking, “how do we get the resources to do this?”. It
is a fundamentally different approach.
The clientelism so prevalent in politics in the Republic
is another aspect of a failing and underdeveloped political system which makes
a mockery of both party politics and citizens. ‘Clientelism’ is where citizens
are dependent on party political intervention to get services to which they are
entitled (or, in some cases, not entitled). State services should be provided
on the basis of rights and, where it is possible that rights are denied, by
appeal to an independent body which has no party political makeup. Party
politicians should have no role in assisting their constituents to get
services; where there are gross infringements of citizen’s rights they should
certainly be entitled to take up issues at a parliamentary or council level,
and at a parliamentary level have the wider ability to reframe policy. Failure
to grasp this nettle has led to many of the planning and other scandals which
have emerged over recent years in the Republic.
Civil society is not elected and sometimes not electable,
for a variety of reasons. But the idea that democracy resides only in voting
every few years is a nineteenth century concept which is well beyond its sell
by date. Democracy is in the air we breathe (literally – Is it
polluted?). Democracy is in the decisions we make as citizens and consumers.
Democracy is in the time we invest as volunteers and change agents. Democracy
is in how we are treated in work (or unemployment), and what we work on. Civil
society may not generally have the power that governments do but it is an
inseparable part of a functioning democracy, and it should be valued as such.
The health of civil society, and the interaction between
it and government are a good marker of how democratic a particular society is.
Both Northern Ireland and the Republic have vibrant community and voluntary
sectors. But if we take as a measuring stick how much attention the respective
governments pay to these, both North and South have a long and probably winding
road to travel.
- - - - - -
Eco-Awareness
Eco-Awareness
Larry Speight brings us his monthly column –
If you watched the September documentary on Channel 4
about the attack by Al-Qaida on the World Trade Centre in New York in 2001 you
may like me have been captivated by the drama and disturbed by the huge death
toll and the anguish that would have been felt by the family and friends of
those who died.
The New Yorkers watching the tragedy unfold were in a
state of fear and shock. What I found instructive was that even in the face of
the fire and smoke, the wail of sirens, the live accounts given by TV and
radio, those in the vicinity of the towers made no effort to take evasive
action. When the upper floors of the South West Tower were engulfed by fire people
watching the event on the TV screen in Times Square gasped in horror, some were
angry while most were confused about what to do and seemed after a pause to go
about their business. The authorities did not immediately order an evacuation
of the areas likely to be affected by the collapse of the towers. The
consequences of this lack of foresight was apparent when the South West Tower
collapsed sending mountainous clouds of poisonous smoke, inevitably containing
human tissue, gushing through the city. This was repeated with the collapse of
the second tower.
This reaction to an unfolding disaster - disbelief,
confusion, inaction and attempted recourse to normalcy - accurately reflects
our response to climate change. Like the smoke and fire billowing out of the
Twin Towers, climate change, as a direct result of human activity, is fact.
Millions of people are already suffering from climate change. Witness the
severe drought in Kenya and other East African countries. The long-term
consequences of inaction are clear. If the temperature of our planet rises
above 2 degree Celsius as against pre-industrial levels eco-systems will
collapse bringing the downfall of industrial civilization. The point we have
yet to grasp, including government officials preparing for the all important UN
Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December, is that we are at the
point where radical and decisive action concerning how we live can no longer be
delayed.
The question, like that faced by New Yorkers who watched
the Twin Towers burn, is what should we do? When we witness a disaster of
enormous magnitude people are inclined to feel powerless and either turn away
or look on in fascination. What the witnesses to the attack on the Twin Towers
should have done is move as far away from them as quickly as possible rather
than stand within close distance of the inferno gazing with a mixture of horror
and awe.
With regard to climate change, the worst disaster of
all-time, we should not watch passively as it unfolds but act to reduce the
rate at which the planet is warming. One way we can do this is by joining the
Guardian sponsored 10:10 campaign, which asks individuals, businesses and
organisations such as schools and Local Councils to cut their carbon emissions
by 10% in 2010 [ see http://www.1010uk.org].
Behaviour is value-based. This means that if we are to
act to safe-guard our home planet Earth we have to expand our circumference of
empathy to include people we don’t personally know as well as non-human beings.
Our sense of care and responsibility has to be inclusive. We are not islands as
we are socialised to believe but part of an intricate web of social, economic
and environmental inter-dependences.
|
