Thursday, January 24, 2019

DEMOCRACY MUST NOT RELY ON SAINTS

We live  in complex times for democracy: corrupt and incompetent politicians abound, there is lack of capacity for action on matters decisive for well-being (such as the regulation of globalization) and misinformation goes viral on social networks. With all that, it is increasingly difficult for ordinary citizens to believe in politicians, to choose consciously their political party or to believe democracy is the best possible political system.

Nevertheless, in fact, all alternatives are worse (something all children should be taught at school): the more we move towards autocratic systems, the less political decisions are scrutinized, and worse the outcomes will be. The story of the XXI and XX centuries clearly demonstrates how non-democratic or pseudo-democratic societies are much worse than the Western democracies.

With that in mind, we must focus on deepening current democratic systems, increasing transparency in decision-making, penalizing bad management of public goods, increasing turnover in public office (by limiting mandates in all political and public management positions), and creating rules that push political actors on the right track.

We should use the law, and not just rely on the kindness of people, to have a better functioning democracy and public management (the same can be said for the functioning of markets and organizations). Obviously, everything is easier, and works better, if political actors and public managers are well-intentioned and honest. But there will always be those who are not. And there is no way that the democratic system can filter them all out from the start. So, we must be able to filter them throughout the process. That is, while holding political or public office, dishonest, cowardly, incompetent, or corrupt individuals must be detected, removed, and punished. The whole system must be built on clever rules that do not favor ineptitude or corruption. That is achieved not only through the existence of heavy criminal consequences, but by making corruption so difficult, risky and non-profitable that the agents decide not to go that way.

For example, if we demand full bank transparency from governors for a given number of years, since they began their duties, they will hardly accept bribes. Obviously, such an elimination of financial privacy should be compensated. Politicians should earn more but be much more scrutinized.

Those who are incompetent and dishonest, and who wish to use the policy for purely personal purposes, will feel deterred from entering these functions. On the other hand, those who are committed to the public cause and are guided by serious behavior, will not fear this transparency. If we think about the public gains of having competent and honest people running the state, rather than corrupt and dishonest, surely a lot of money would be saved, even by substantially increasing the salaries of political leaders.

The witch hunt that is currently being made of political agents, going after all the failures they incur (even the small ones) and getting everything into the same bag (from the one who forged a presence, to the one who hired the cousin by direct adjustment, to the one who stole 10 million), favors the conclusion that politicians are all the same.

That is a wrong attitude, forgery of reality and dangerous. It leads to deception and helps the appearance of messianic leaders (such as Donald Trump, Jair Bolsonaro, Nicolas Maduro, among others) who come to power only by selling a discourse of salvation of the people, for nothing or little to fulfill later. These messianic solutions tend to be more autocratic, therefore more corrupt, inefficient, less transparent and to attract the worst to power.

What politics needs is good rules. With good rules, the best will appear and the worst will tend to disappear. This is done with more democracy, not less. Also, we should promote more informed debate, more access to true information, the greater participation and civic scrutiny by all and a clear and efficient legal system. Let’s walk that path.

Also published on Público newspapper at January the 24th of 2019



No comments:

Post a Comment

Por uma produção amiga da felicidade

"Desde que Adam Smith publicou “A Riqueza das Nações” que se gerou a noção de que a ciência económica havia de ser a disciplina que nos...