[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
#1954: democracy for Haiti: Poincy comments
From: Jean Poincy <email@example.com>
Mark Gill wrote:
"this view suggests the old idea of a "benevolent dictatorship", which
we have heard for a long time....but, how does one have any assurance
that those who would fight for this position have any different
motivation that those who are pushing for democracy? i cant recall a
dictator of the past whose desire was to insure the well-being of the
I truly believe that "the old idea of a 'benevolent dictatorship'"
can be modernized to fit the democratic trend in reshaping a society
like Ayiti. We will have a mixture of non-participatory democracy and an
authoritarian executive government embodied either in a group of
individuals or a person, whichever suits best the reality of Ayiti.
With a non-participatory democracy the masses would just not go
directly and elect candidates in higher executive/legislative offices,
both for national and local governments. That would be like the American
style of democracy at its birth where people could directly vote in
office only congressmen while a qualified body of electors chose
senators and the president.
The difference would be that no one at all would be elected by the
masses. Town meetings would be conducted to assess the constituents'
needs and develop programs accordingly. People would not be persecuted
because of their differing views with authorities as they express them.
Instead they would be heard, but nothing says that the authority would
have to put some merit to these oppositions if they don't feel it good
for the collectivity.
Definitely, this style of government by a strong group or a person
along with carefully chosen members of other government's branches, we
are heading to a different kind of authoritarian ruling. The most of our
worries, accountability to the people is not inherent to any form of
authoritarian government. For the need for it should be discounted.
It would be senseless to try to make sure that such a government does
what it is sets out to do. Because it would depart from the principle
that it would do it. With this frame of mind among all officials, any
removal of such a government for its failure would be dealt with in the
government itself, all branches included. Its removal can be done by
nonviolent coup, agreement among those who can show that the job is not
done. The masses would have to be totally excluded from this kind of
political disruption, like it used to be in some eras of the Roman
What to hope for is that the strong group or person in the executive
branch would be willing to do what it sets out to do such as building
Ayiti, ensuring collective-security and make it economically productive.
The question to ask rather is how and where to find such a group or
Ayiti has lived, lives and will live