Why democracy is failing | Paddy Ashdown | TEDxBrussels
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 5 ธ.ค. 2014
- This talk was given at a local TEDx event, produced independently of the TED Conferences. Why Democracy is Failing
Lord Ashdown is a former member of the British Parliament and a diplomat with a lifelong commitment to international cooperation. Throughout his career, Paddy Ashdown has moved across the international stage. He served as a Royal Marine and an intelligence officer in MI6, the Secret Intelligence Service of the United Kingdom, before becoming a member of Parliament. In 1988 he became the first leader of the newly formed Liberal Democrat party. After leaving Parliament he served as the High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina.
About TEDx, x = independently organized event In the spirit of ideas worth spreading, TEDx is a program of local, self-organized events that bring people together to share a TED-like experience. At a TEDx event, TEDTalks video and live speakers combine to spark deep discussion and connection in a small group. These local, self-organized events are branded TEDx, where x = independently organized TED event. The TED Conference provides general guidance for the TEDx program, but individual TEDx events are self-organized.* (*Subject to certain rules and regulations)
Spoken the truth which is very hard these days to realise that Politics is not being served to its citizens. Thank you Mr Ashdown for shining the torch of your revelations. 👏👏👏
Power by The People, and Power to The People! Well articulated! 👏👏👏
Democracies were made to rule cities, not countries, let alone empires. Assuming that democracy at level city is not already corrupt imgine then at a bigger frame.
The thing is, dictatorships and authoritarian regimes have historically created an extreme level of democracy.
Plus democracy is of Satan and not Allah the Quran and bible have laws to follow
? How so? If I’m correct democracies have had to fail and learn from failure many times to get to the point we are at.
Lord Ashdown’s thoughts on governance are not just solutions to what ails many human clusters these days. They are the cumulative resonance of a life-long deep and thick engagement with people. He made my day!
Great talk ...👍👍👍
He's talking about a move away from representative democracy towards participatory democracy.
I hope so.
Participatory democracy would be nearly impossible to maintain on a large scale
@@haydenpack6947 I think it could be maintained, on a large scale, if organized right.
@@haydenpack6947 Actually, if voting could be done securely online using BlockChain tech or something similar, then participatory democracy would be more scalable now than ever before. No travel required to cast a vote. You'd also be able to change your vote if you change your mind before the votes are counted.
I'm 6 years in the future You Ain't Seen Nothing Yet certainly after watching this we're getting no better
Wow. I'm only 7 mins in, and I'm looking at the publishing date. This speech sounds like it could have been made 18 months later. I mean, up til 7 mins in, it sounds still really relevant.
Such things will *always be relevant.*
If politicians delivered on their promises we wouldn't be so disillusioned with the establishment.
If there was such a thing as Democracy, then politicians would have some incentive to be honest, and as well some incentive to work harder on keeping their promises.
Politicians are just liars. Dictatorship is the only way/
Limited monarchism is the most sensible form of government for our time
@@haydenpack6947 Do you mean a constitutional monarchy as in UK, NZ, Canada and Australia?
I think what needs to happen is we need publicly funded elections inorder to remove unelected special private interests from distorting how our representatives govern.
With that we can then use ranked choice voting to incentivize political candidates to work to appeal to the wider group of population, not just the extremes.
Democracy is failing because of those who democracy would threaten their power, either economic or political.
Hello from May 18, 2020!!
Lovely to see the tagore's poem couples cited by you . Proud of my heritage and my forefathers like Tagore. Proud Indian 🇮🇳
The only High Representative Bosnia & Herzegovina ever had who showed a modicum of appreciation for what was actually needed to take the country towards a democratic, liberal future. That's why he's reviled both by Serb & Croat nationalists and their numerous respective enablers.
It's lobbyists nothing but lobbyists the politicians become their dependents the benefits they Reap from these deals is immense on both sides we have to hold our politicians to a higher standard
I am an indian. And democracy sucks here. To take any decision , it takes 40-50years here. You can take decision s only when there is a majority party.
Decision making process is always delayed or hindered by opposition for the sake of appeasement of their vote banks.
Communist china has lifted 300 millions people out of poverty. India has pushed 100 millions into poverty.
Only idiots or sugarcoaters only become leaders in a democracy rather than a competent person.
An average person has no idea about country's economy, foreign policy, etc. They votes on the basis of emotions and appeasement rather than information.
Plato has said more about these problems.
I’m so pleased Paddy Pants Down lived long enough to eat his hat and see the Brexit referendum.
Thank you for your insightful speech.
How about we make a start by getting rid of certain aspects of political correctness.
A "start" toward...? A couple of examples of the "political correctness aspects" please?
"Political Correctness" = "NOUN
the avoidance, often considered as taken to extremes, of forms of expression or action that are perceived to exclude, marginalize, or insult groups of people who are socially disadvantaged or discriminated against.
"women like him for his civil rights stand and political correctness"
Hmmm. "An avoidance taken to extremes" I struggle with the meanings of this concept. Help Please?
Would the use of the word "mob" here (in these comments) be a political correctness?
If, as he says, govts. lack ultimate power, because sovereignty is actually held by global markets (ie. finance), then how will deferring govt. power to the people change market sovereignty over us? It isn't as simple as market forces as has been proved over the last few decades.
>He achieved international recognition for his role in Bosnia-Herzegovina as its High Representative from 2002 to 2006, following his vigorous lobbying for military action against Yugoslavia in the 1990s.
>Ashdown had long been on his party's social democratic wing, supporting the 1977 Lib-Lab pact, and the SDP-Liberal Alliance. In the early 1980s he was a prominent campaigner against the deployment in Europe of American nuclear-armed cruise missiles, describing them at a Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament rally in Hyde Park in 1983 as "the front end of the whole anti-nuclear struggle. It is the weapon we HAVE to stop."
Respectable background
There's a great, short speech here, and a powerful argument....but the speaker talks past his own point, probably because he had 15 minutes, and felt that he needed to fill the time. The essential point is that nation-states have failed to cooperate in the real task of humanity--governance for world prosperity, peace, cooperation--and we need to move beyond their narrow interests and toward the broad and planet-wide.
Seneca in other words a global government that makes richer countries pay to support poorer countries, right?
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.
there is no democracy, outside of helvetia. what is failing is that modern evolution of feudalism properly called 'elective aristocracy.'
"...he who molds public sentiment goes deeper than he who enacts statutes or pronounces decisions. He makes statutes and decisions possible or impossible to be executed." -- Abraham Lincoln, from his First Debate with Stephen Douglas at Ottawa, Illinois, August 21, 1858. Read in con
The voices of unity and progressive politics, sounds very nice and cosy. But what about all those voices from people who's livelihoods have been trashed by progressive politics( neoliberalism)..are they harsh and raucous..far left and extreme right or are they just people asking for a little fairness, while watching inequality grow to new extremes and our politicians find new phrases that make it all sound ever so acceptable.
This is the man who, before the Brexit referendum, said he would never forgive those who refused to accept the democratic decision of the people, and then when his side lost refused to accept the democratic decision of the people.
That is one the problems I encounter when people ( I included myself) have to make a decision in order to vote for something that we don't really know. When We are told lot of lies by those who represent us or those who wants to represent us. It is super hard to vote in a democratic way when even journalists are so political declined and biast.
I get very angry when I hear misinformation, specially when it is so obvious. In any case, I see your point and it seems fair to me.
when did he say he refused to accept the result. If you dont like the result you are entitled to go on making the case for your own side you know
I agree with him in that powers should be developed from nation states to local communities in such matters as health, education, and welfare. I also agree that nations should retain control of militaries, international politics, and transport infrastructure (for the most part). Am not sure about national economic matters.
A politician promises to fight for 10 values. He wins those inconsequential to his personal secret aims and loses (after a hard visible fight replete with poetry and rhetoric no less) those which serve him and his masters to lose. A sophists trick to win representation for the purpose of serving his own agenda and that of his class..
BANKS BLEED US DRY SEE ICELAND
Robert Galletta
PCB's... private Central Banks
It is more interesting reading the comments than listening to this guy. It is a dangerous thing to say democracy is failing because that means changing with another system, and i don’t see any another system that can work better for the people.
I'd rather live under the rule of 1 tyrant, then a mass of them.
mass can be chage a tyrant dynasty not
Strange how what he describes as the solution was already envisaged by the framers of the U.S. Constitution well over 200 years ago. Sadly that fine document's interpretation was changed about 85 years ago, allowing for the outrageous increase of the fed. gov. in size and scope to this day.
I agree with him in that powers should be developed from nation states to local communities in such matters as health, education, and welfare. I also agree that nations should retain control of militaries, international politics, and transport infrastructure (for the most part). Am not sure about national economic matters.
@@geoffreyharris5931 I basically agree with you, as does the U.S. Constitution, my point was that the U.S. fed. gov. has essentially circumvented their Constitutional limitation with an irrational interpretation.
This man is absolutely right!.
Democracy is failing because people are failing democracy through contradiction.
IT IS NOT DEMOCRACY. We have a 2 party system, vetting, etc.
The good thing about democracy is it will evolve it is a fluid liquid thing we will change it we will make it better
Nah. Democracy always ends in Wars. WWI and II are great examples of failed democracies.
Being from the USA I don't know him but he started with dispair over the citizenry not supporting and rallying around the countries leaders.Then he acknowledged the true issue, that the government has to take care of the marketplace. Followed by a short bit of eventual global governance. After this he talks about a feel good bottom up governance that he knows is pie in the sky and will never happen. But can't we all just get along and appreciate our diversity he says.
Why did he not say anything about the strengths of his country? Because he had to say his Country screwed up. He could not defend his Country, Could not give a reason for his fellow countrymen to be proud of there state in life. It's a failed democracy and time to turn it over to the bankers and corporations that are going to control us since they have the money and you know what they say about money.
Back in 1983 it was repported in the Economist they planned on a world currency in 2018. They must be prophetic. Everything is going as planned. Now we need to look for a leader to reunite Europe in the spirit of the Roman Empire.
nice troll XD
#EqualRepresentationWithUnequalTaxation makes cost/benefit trade-offs political. The "costed" and "benefited" are different people. It reassigns individual cost/benefit trade-offs to the government, which as we know, isn't statesmen carefully weighing cost vs benefit for the common interest, but politicians weighing it for their own. This is not so much corruption as simply an impossible task. Equal representation coupled with unequal taxation is an absolutely fundamental contradiction. See twitter.com/search?q=%23EqualRepresentationWithUnequalTaxation&src=typd
Do you understand people? The failing of the intellectual is to detach themselves from them people.
This ide might very well work, but I see some obvious unadressed flaws, first of all the problem put forward is "the world is more interconnected and complex than ever, current political systems are failing" and proposing the solution "lets split every nation into smaller nations!" Seems very contradictory, since it will make everything even more complex than now. The only upside I see to this is thay you introduce competition inside the country to try to develop the best political system, but the potential downsodes are huge since people generally live in segregaded areas and "sub nationalism" (i.e 'I hate people from the poorer/richer sub nation') will play a huge role in peoples mind and it will most likely tare the whole nation appart completely. This guy seems to have completely ignored the lazyness and group thinking of humans and put forth a dreamish vision instead.
Another crucial talk by Ashdown...always worth the listen
What Mr Ashdown proposes here will only work if the vast majority of the population involved has a good moral compass and is well educated. Unfortunately reality shows otherwise. Yes ideally, in a true democracy "the people" are in control of their destiny and their national policies, laws and financial system.
Plato's critique of Democracy. The common peoplezrenot fit to rule. An Enlightened Philospher assisted by a meritorious aristocracy! Like Alexander the Great, or Marcus Aurelius! 🤔😉😏
Lets try Schweitz system. A few polititions are paid from govern. The rest polititions have ordinary jobs. Thats, how polititions have there view groundad. Not so many tests on the voters, and then see how the people handle that.
Jesus Christ, this was in 2014?!?!? It's even more relevant now!
Country's wanting to leave the UK the EU ect are not necessarily making a bad move they
may be making a bad move and many voters likely haven't though about it carefully enough but it also make it much easier for them to negotiate trade deals with other country's and to make choices for better or worse.
I feel with Scotland it's very likely national pride since it seems to spend noticeably more than it makes so that would be a bad move for Scotland economically.
With the UK and the EU I honestly don't know yet where still firmly in NATO so hopefully it wont require larger defence spending?
Economically export and import taxes in the EU are much lower than for country's in Asia so deals there may make more of an impact despite us trading more with the EU.
I don't know how it will effect expats or possible expats that wanted to retire in sunny Spain or in the alps I don't know the stats for this but I suspect we export more retiary's than we import and import more workers than we export so it may lower output but reduce a flow of money out of the UK from both retiary's going out and workers sending money home about 11billion and those retiring over seas I suspect more since it's basically there whole cost of living there moving abroad.
Total Exports are around 550 billion though so it depends how much that would be effected by a lower rate of production?
Its really not simple but I can definitely see rational arguments for or against especially if like most you don't do much in depth economic analysis.
He starts off well but the idea that a global government would fix the true underlying problems with the earth is wishful thinking.
He touched on it briefly with the power of traditional and social media; the problem is not that we have flawed systems but that WE are flawed. We're emotional and therefore irrational creatures living in a universe with equation for empathy
Ryan, That's why consensus democracy is our only hope. The fact that we are flawed. Democracy only works via the middle of the bell shaped curve to circumvent the delusional and ill-informed. Propaganda destroys that.
Benevolent dictators are more efficient but impossible to come by...and still don't please everyone. It's not possible. Either way, pleasing the rich and powerful leaves the common man worse off.
@Ryan Tyler : _" We're emotional and therefore irrational"_ Ignoring a such a huge facet of humanity such as emotions is unwise at best. Emotions are not a problem, but ignoring them and having no affinity with such a natural part of being human can cause emotions to fester and become corrupted. Hiding from emotions is extremely unhealthy, and that is exactly where irrationality comes from.
Do you think a person who does not feel anything when another person dies or is harmed, is a rational person?
Compassion is an emotion, and compassion is all that keeps a person honest. One might say honor keeps a person honest, but many multitudes of atrocities have been committed *because* of honor. But someone who cares about other has a reason to be honest (a far better reason than any threat involving an afterlife). Someone who is compassionate toward others is far more well balanced mentally, and therefore has the ability to be logical. People without compassion are illogical at best.
Love is an emotion. Do you really think that someone who cannot feel love, is a rational person?
Fear is an emotion. Do you really think that someone with no fear, is a rational person? Without fear, what stops you from placing yourself and others in dangerous positions? And if there is no fear to accomplish this, is that rational or logical?
We are flawed. We are flawed because instead of dealing with our emotions in a healthy way, we suppress and hide them away, allowing them to fester and grow. Did you know that at it's root, anger is simply energy? You get angry because that is a natural reaction, it is a prod to get a person moving. A motivation to protect oneself and others they care about. Anger comes from pain and fear.
These things by themselves are not good or bad, they are signals to help us, and motivations to prompt us into action. It is not the emotion that is flawed, it is what *an individual does* with an emotion that makes it good or bad. Many have used their anger to help in the fight for freedom. Without this emotion, we would never have achieved what little freedom we do have.
Balance in all things is key. You need to be well physically, or the mind is not as sharp. You need to be well mentally or the body suffers. You need to be aware emotionally, or the mind *will* suffer from unfounded fear and biases.
I could say a lot more about all other types of emotions, why they are intrinsic to our health and for our capacity for logical thinking. But I know most people resist anything new, so it's quite possible I am just wasting my time here. But for the sake of all of us, I hope people will work harder on stabilizing their emotions instead of burying them.
@George Roberts : _"pleasing the rich and powerful leaves the common man worse off"_
Absolutely. This where our biggest problems lie. There are so many who support the rich, even unto their own undoing. This comes from ignorance, the inability to see past personal greed, or even the incredibly remote and micro slim chance of realizing that greed.
Aylbdr Madison emotions are irrational constructs and hold back societal progress. The real truth is nothing we do that does not bring us closer to our apex as a society is worthless in the end. We don’t live forever so we have only 3 rational paths in life: pool our collective resources to find a way to perfect our lives and enjoy life afterward, enjoy life now while we can and leave the consequences to the next generation (which we are seeing the results of now), or use our brief and insignificant existences to build something that lasts longer than we ever could
How can we possibly say Democracy is failing, when the simple fact is that no one has ever even tried it before?
Fantastic speech. So very true. Actually power hijacking happens also in government branches with the police as the most clear example. Here a class of Office academics micro manage everything far away from the knowledge and needs of the citizens as well as the police officers
Why was he called Paddy? It wasn't his real name...
Can someone explain? (thoroughly please, I'm not british).
He grew up in Northern Ireland where he picked up an Irish accent. At school in England they nicknamed him Paddy as a reference to his supposed Irishness.
i don't think you are right saying the power today reside in our national state capitals it reside in all lobby or corporation which finance that national state capital if only we were able to funnel all that lobbying money toward acomplishing sustainability
If there is any group that should NEVER ever be asked to pontificate on democracy it is the Liberal party in the UK. They are so divorced from any conceivable conception of what it is they will do the following:
1. Fight to be elected to a national parliament they do not believe in.
2. They will support any devious political device available that will enable them to railroad an entire electorate, against any consent, to be ruled by a foreign power of THEIR choosing.
3. They will afford themselves of any political bribe from aforesaid foreign power to sustain them in their political fight to subvert the nation they are duty bound to serve.
And why? Because they are a collection of irresponsible criminals (and not just political crimes), long bereft of legitimate political authority and they will seek ANY means, no matter how illegitimate or illegal to stay relevant.
If any group was to serve as THE example of why political parties should be outlawed it is the Liberal party of the UK.
What Paddy Ashdown should have been asked to speak on is why a national political party should be able to operate within a state in order to illegally impose foreign rule on an unwilling electorate and why the British Army, like the other armed, civil and secret services of the UK have aided and abetted an illegal invasion of the nation they were sworn to serve?
Funny how these politicians can't shut up about things they know nothing about but are so silent about things they have world class knowledge.
Oh someone please think of the politicians lol
Poor performance. Immediately discredited himself by A: claiming Scotland was fully of hateful nationalists (there hasn't been a more civic inclusive independence movement in history - it was the British Unionism that was, and is, dark and non inclusive) B: Claiming his country was England. England isn't a country, and Scotland was considering leaving the UK, not England.
What would "empower" the "Empowered Citizen"?
Wait a minute wait a minute. The esteemed speaker is confusing cause and effect. Political extremism is not the cause of the collapse of democracy, it's an EFFECT. The speaker utterly FAILS to identify the cause.
Not even a little true. please learn from history, or at least listen to the guy, calling him esteemed while not watching the video makes you appear extremely idiotic.
Yes/No Hank Chinaski is kinda right but it is more complex then this , in truth the voter is always the beginning. They voted corrupt or over enthusiastic politicians basically a lot of NGO persuaded hard politicians to set a course which would end in a way which would end in a economic crisis or simply in something the voters doesn't desire by all means. This is the point when democracy fails and the extremism rise from the ground. It always true that the voter has something to say in it but is also true most politicians simply say : Sry I can't do anything else .
" in truth the voter is always the beginning" which is exactly my point.
Is the cause "losing jobs" to immigrants and third world countries?? You typical sad uneducated idiot, its the vested interested who lobby the government to lower trade barriers and encourage local companies to out source. Let me put it this way, if the third world workers makes the same amount as you, your job will not be out sourced. But you probably don't want that because you are racist and think by virtue of race you should make more than another human being in another part of the world. Did that answer your question?
@Honor Trust, I agree that thinking that you innately deserve to make more than others is narcissistic, but why do others in the "third world" make less than we do? Is it because they suffer from corrupt governments? Their countries lack natural resources? Maybe they used to be colonised and exploited by our predecessors? WHY? Why didn't they develop a more functional government? Why didn't they colonise us or conquer lands with more resources in the past when conquest wasn't frowned upon? I don't know the answer, but they just didn't and we did. Or maybe our ancestors just moved to a more functional and wealthy country. We are wealthier because we and our predecessors worked for it, took risks and got lucky. Finally, we're wealthier because the world isn't fair and some are always going to be wealthier than others. To suggest that we should give up our hard earned advantages to those who did not earn them is not only Marxist, but goes counter to the laws of natural selection/competition. Frankly it's unsustainable and laughable.
Who's watching this in 2023?
He does not understand that he and his country are a living metaphor of evil. He did prove it in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Bishop Peric and academic Kukic did prove it, but in vain. So he thinks that he is a good person, but for me and many countrymen think that he is far from love, truth.
I hope you don't mean everyone in his country...
of course, he is only a living metaphor of pax Britannica
I disagree with the premise.
What an unlearned person. He has no idea what he is talking about, as soon as one accepts democracy as an option one has eliminated reason as a possibility.
POWER TRIES TO BANKRUPT HE PUBLIC SECTOR, AND CREATE THE WASTE OF HUMAN EFFORT.
3000 views in a year time. Bet ted's funders didn't want this on the front-page.
cuz its not interresting or insightfull enough.
I hoped for valid statement for why democracy fails but found old man who cries back for old times and realised politicians have agendas. Good for him doing something on retirement but I don't think he belongs to Ted talk
politicians should not be respected.
As scot who is for independence I think the narrow right wing exclusive nationalism is that which campaigns for the union and I think paddy does him self an in justice making himself look foolish in this talk.
The old federalist right wing ideology. Nothing new here. He’s talking about privatization of government.
He is just an ultra left globalist apologist .A communist in sheep clothing .DEPLORABLE
Bilderberg attendee
What a bourgeois philosophy LOL!!!
How is it bourgeois?
You digress too much Sir.
Standard neoliberal drivel
another crazy leftwinger