Comments on The Future of Democracy

Charles you are ignoring one HUGE issue. The American People would not have rejected the imperialist war in Iraq if it was successful. Frankly, most Americans would not have given a shit about it and would have enjoyed watching a super fast war on TV. (As long as coverage did not interupt Football or American Idol)

just me, my most pessimistic side agrees with you. but that understanding still does not disturb the crux of my theory: capital will go to war, lose or win.

It might just be my fever, but I think I actually understood this post. Cough.

i would agree, a capitalist state will go to war, with or without the people's consent or cooperation. however, that is not a phenomenon exclusive to capital. it tends to happen with various forms of society. capital and democracy are among the only forms in which appeals to the people, even if those appeals are futile and for show, are necessary. that of course doesn't disrupt your hypothesis.

Charles: You're ignoring (or misconstruing) the role of technology in all this. The advent of the firearm made democracy a necessity regardless of empire: a relatively simple device makes it possible for anyone to kill members of the ruling class; the only way for the ruling class to avoid this fate is to create political mechanisms that create the illusion of collective enterprise.

The threat of computerized warfare isn't that the ruling class no longer needs us to wage war, it's that the computerized weapons are so much more dangerous than a simple rifle that those who can afford to manufacture and control such weapons can effectively guarantee their own safety from the omnipresent threat of class warfare.

This does, of course, obviate the need for the illusion of democracy.

Heinlein did this entire post better in Starship Troopers.

Good post.

Are contractors (mercenaries) an obvious example of Capital's relationship to warfare? The lack of necessity needed to gain and maintain popular support of war is guaranteed by groups of trained capitalist warriors.

America is burning only the dying embers of empire. The "tribute" system - trade and credit whereby american consumers get cheap goods from China, among others, while we only pay them back in ever devaluing debt made in a fiat currency that we "print" at our convenience - is falling to pieces with the credit bubble, the cost of the war in Iraq and the slow switch away from the dollar as the world's reserve currency.

With energy costs skyrocketing, the capital markets in tailspin, and the most uneven education system in the industrialized world, America produces very little of actually value to anyone. But commentations and politicials have nothing to say about it other than "I'm bullish on America" or "America always comes out ahead" jingoist nothings

Our political capital is all but spent: No one would have let North Korea or Iran have the bomb, and now the United States can't even stop them without pulling favors from every single one of their neighbors.

George Bush and his cronies believe it's the summer of 1945 still, where people appreciate American's as freedom bearers and liberators. Well it is sort of like the late forties, but instead we're Britain, hearing glorious reports of our successful and amazing empire as it crumbles to pieces around us and we live on food rations.

Um, so if you're primary method of political education is the military, you end up with a military-obsessed electorate?

Interesting analysis, but it hardly applies to USA, because of the way public information is handled.
Do you know about the Creel Committee, or Committee on Public Information? It's basically a very successful attempt to convince the US public of the necessity to enter WWI. It was enthusiastically perceived as a weapon in the hands of a learned minority to manipulate the majority into thinking like them. This has definitely shaped US democracy, and explains why US has been involved in so much wars.
On the other hand, the countries that have a fair shot at defining the world history will usually be run by the elite, but that it is not necessarily the case in smaller countries, where democracy sometimes blossoms in its purity. In smaller countries, such as Canada, the elite has no interest in politics, and feels more empowered in places such as Universities, leaving power to virtually noone. This could be your polyarchy.

Yeah, I'm holding my breath for the emergence of polyarchy and the subsequent end of war.

Yes, Athenian democracy was partially about the expansion of hoplite warfare and then the navy, and the growing demand of a warrior class for political representation, but we must also remember that oligarchic and democratic tendencies existed in parallel, and were constantly in tension. Nearly all of the literary record is one of hostility to democracy by elites. The Peloponnesian War was a conflict of ideologies as well as an expression of empire, and democracy was rife with internal contradiction. I think the enduring lesson from Athens is that they continued to call themselves a democracy long after reverting to oligarchic rule.

There also seems to be some confusion in your post between ancient and modern democracy. Our own democratic tradition arises from the assertion of a rising bourgeoisie against the feudal lords and clerics of the middle ages, and the growth of a dynamic middle class. The fundamental problem with democratic theory is that too little attention is paid to the issue of balancing the interests of the many against the power of the few. There is a naive faith that this will somehow work itself out that has become increasingly less tenable over the last century.

Lester Thurow points out that democracy is about radical equality while capitalism is about radical inequality, and therein lies the problem. Capitalism is our dominant ideology, democracy has been eclipsed, and popular consent for war is less and less relevant.

Wow Charles, I was just starting to think you were a simple misogynistic pig, and here you go saying something that is actually thought provoking. I read an interesting article on this topic, that is was the rowers at Salamis that ushered in the golden age of Athenian democracy. Interesting stuff.