Saturday, March 3, 2012

FDA Podcast: Money and Democracy (Part 2 of 3)

In this second of three podcasts on Money and Democracy, FDA executive director, Mr. Stephen Garvey, and invited guests, Mr. Brian Seaman of the Alberta Civil Liberties Research Center and Mr. Adam Adris former director of the Muslim Council of Calgary, discuss how money interests can be disconnected from democratic processes. Garvey and the panelists quickly conclude that money interests cannot be fully disconnected from democratic processes, and then they go on to discuss ways to empower and inform the public about democratic issues.

FDA Money and Democracy (Part 2 of 3) 

2 comments:

  1. Money and Democracy
    They say you can't have the cake and eat it also, Similarly you can't have a capable government or an efficient political system without paying a handy amount for it. The cost of the senate elections has recently sprung many reactions from both media and public. The media tried their level best to propagate the perception that how obscene amounts of money are being spent upon on politicians and reminded the pubic that at the end of their day it is the tax payer's money and should only be used for their welfare and etc. In my view the reality is that the money being spent upon in such political systems is a necessity for the efficient running of a country.

    Elections are probably the only thing in a country done at such a scale and this definitely means the expenditures are very high and since we want the country to be governed in a democratic way there is no choice left for us apart from financing it or else we probably should say goodbye to democracy and elections. Since we have established that money has to be thrown into the elections, Some might argue that politicians or political parties themselves should finance them but this isn't a bright idea at all. It won't work and might even play a role in getting incapable people on the executive chair.

    If politicians or political parties start financing such things themselves there is a great chance of immoral behavior and illegal practices taking place. If this happens then the rich might start doing well rather than the ones with the good policies. It will become just like a competition of who is more wealthy. it can also led to corruption as both the political parties and politicians will be tempted to recover the money lost in this process and will still take that money but this time through illegal means. There are various examples in 3 rd world countries where politicians spend handsome amount of money on their political campaigns and etc and then steal public money beyond limits.

    On the other hand if things move the same way they are moving they might hurt a little bit to our pockets but in the long run it will prove to be worthy and will ensure best leadership for the state.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You overlook high contributions levels and no expenditure limits like in Alberta and the USA at the federal level of government favor wealthy segments of society.

      Also, you did not mention role of lobbyists in using money to buy influence.

      I think you underestimate the role of money in corrupting democracy.

      Equality must be infused with freedom, or else freedom itself will undermine democracy through plutocracy.

      Delete

Thank you for sharing your perspective.