Finally, the much awaited, and perhaps much dreaded, Brexit divorce proceedings have begun, the first steps in a valiant attempt by the UK to extricate itself, least painfully and most profitably, from the EU, after last year's referendum in which 51.9% of those voted (72.2%) favoured an exit.
Momentous in many ways, this event has been hailed as an 'Independence Day' by UKIP leader Nigel Farage, whose campaign started the day he stepped into the European Parliament decades ago; as a ‘Victoire de la Liberte' by Marine Le Pen, the French National Front leader; and by Donald Trump, whose expressive remark "I think it's a great thing" was delivered, ironically, in Scotland, which voted to remain.
Brexit was also applauded as a triumph of democracy; the people's emphatic defence of their primacy in the affairs of the state, asserted in the face of persuasive rhetoric and compelling argument, holding the nation's interest above individual difficulty. There should be no doubt that this portentous decision was taken with much thought, deliberation and analysis, befitting the immensity of the task.
Except that a largely unnoticed Washington Post report rather mischievously suggested that the citizens of the UK may not have been fully aware of what they voted for or why, because apparently, Britons were ‘frantically' googling "What does it mean to leave the EU?" and "What is the EU?"--the top two queries on Google from the UK--hours after taking the historic decision to quit.
Though this does not in itself prove voter ignorance or inadequacy, it does present itself as an aide-memoire of the challenge that has confronted democracy since its birth, an innate and persistent glitch that has always encumbered its advance and thwarted its real potential--citizen rationality. Sure, democracy hasn't risen to our expectations much, but have we risen to the expectations of democracy?
The only way democracy will work, insisted Plato, is by the people sufficiently prepared for it, ridiculing the idea of shoemakers and shopkeepers in political decision making. His observation on the average voter is as perceptive as it is abiding: "He lives from day to day indulging the appetite of the hour, and sometimes he is lapped in drink and strains of the flute; then he becomes a water-drinker, and tries to get thin; then he takes a turn at gymnastics; sometimes idling and neglecting everything, then once more living the life of a philosopher; often he is busy with politics, and starts to his feet and says and does whatever comes into his head; and, if he is emulous of any one who is a warrior, off he is in that direction, or of men of business, once more in that. His life has neither law nor order; and this distracted existence he terms joy and bliss and freedom; and so he goes on".
Democracy demands informed citizens. James Madison, the father of the American constitution, and a true defender of it as president, was well aware of this impediment, and stressed on people's responsibility in a republic: "A people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power knowledge gives. A popular government without popular information or the means of acquiring it is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy, or perhaps both."
Political decisions are high stakes. Their outcomes--laws, taxes, human rights, environment, economic policies, wars, etc--directly affects our collective wellbeing and individual liberty; our immediate present and our long term future. Yet, when it comes to electing our representatives who would decide these outcomes, we are impervious to its import, unmindful of its consequence. Not only do we evade relevant knowledge, but also do an appalling job of evaluating the knowledge we already have, disregarding information that contradicts our current beliefs. It seems, in politics, ignorance is bliss--the very basis of Thomas Carlyle's objection to democracy: "I do not believe in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance."
Our legendary apathy for cognitive effort is most destructive in politics, because it makes us vulnerable to clever rhetoric and ungodly persuasions; emotional obligations and moral biases. We then resort to heuristic and hearsay, profiles and stereotypes, to form opinion. Communalism, xenophobia and racism are upshots of our ignorance; their ascendency in our political narrative, a direct indictment of our nonchalance.
Our democratic responsibilities end with a voting ritual every five years, and in return we expect largesse. We shun information that leads to better governance but expect miracles; we choose actors and cricketers as our law makers and we expect glory; As Nietzsche felt, we're unable to "feel any shame for being unable to rise above our desire to satisfy a host of petty wants".
To lend meaning to the idea of self-government, our involvement in the democratic process needs to be rediscovered, starting with active citizenship at local bodies and working our way up. Federalism is democracy in bite-sized pieces, where authority is easily exerted, discernment and awareness instantly rewarded. But If we intent to sidestep or abandon politics altogether, disown democracy, and continue whingeing, remember what Pogo said: "We've met the enemy, and he is us."
