In Chile we live in a democracy, no doubt, this system has been consolidated since its advent in 1990, but the system of public freedoms and civil rights in our country is procedural and mid-range, ie we enjoyed a political system which in reality reduces democracy to limited participation from decision-making of voters, or citizens can vote in a system of limited competition, unequal and unfair. French political scientist Guy
Hermet and British sociologist Colin Crouch, have conceptualized this phenomenon as was posdemocrática or the end of democracy as originally conceived, currently set for a show elite-controlled media that when competing electorally always have an advantage over their opponents, which ultimately impairs democracy as equal and competitive political system.
The Chilean case, it represents this thesis, a binomial electoral system is not proportional, so that discourages participation, since it's already known to be elected a candidate of the two blocks (with few exceptions), on the other part of competition is uneven, the parties are not funded by the State and, despite the current electoral law, in reality there is no limit on campaign spending, so who has more resources have the greatest potential to win the election, either deputies or senators, so that the electoral period becomes a farce that turns voters into customers, where they are informed by coapts has the most ads in the mass media , and unlimited resources for merchandising, there are even candidates who have had great circus bill in support of their applications. So you can not, the race becomes the market for votes, where ideas do not win, you win the marketing, the people and the sovereign is not just a spectator. This concludes in a democracy-range, which is urgent improvement.
The discussion of voluntary or compulsory voting, you must consider above aspects, since low voter turnout is conditioned not only to voluntary or compulsory voting is much deeper, is due to the quality of democracy, when it is not competitive and equally affects participation. Is not the same voluntary voting a law of parties without state funding that these institutions to finance, ie there are candidates who are the best shoes and others barefoot. All high-intensity European democracies, funding for political parties in proportion to the votes they have obtained the previous election period, so give equal time to compete electorally and in this context voters have the opportunity to elect candidates that compete with similar resources, the difference is made by the ideas and the quality of the candidate.
certainly our democracy requires urgent and serious reform, regionalization with democratically elected regional presidents and regional parliament to change the system of government from presidential to presidentialism with a prime minister who depends on a single camera, a new proportional electoral system A modern electoral service and comptroller, the vote of Chileans abroad without conditions and mainly electoral equality which means political party financing and campaign spending control, because as things stand go straight to a plutocracy, where the "legitimacy" of the system and not based on the "sovereign people", but demagoguery and electoral marketing, which is proportional to the resources owned by the candidate. In this context
with voting obligatory or voluntary, is not guaranteed a larger share than legitimize our democracy.
V. Andres Jouannet Academic
Catholic University of Temuco
Panelist National State
No comments:
Post a Comment