A RECENT poll in the UK suggested that one in five people in the age group 18-45 would prefer a strong unelected leader to democracy. This is worrying, and shows up a serious failure in our education system.
It also seems to be part of a worldwide move away from democracy to dictatorship, autocracy, and various forms of managed democracy. Even a country such as India, once a byword for democracy, now has serious flaws in the way in which minorities find it hard to obtain justice, and academics are put under pressure not to criticise Narendra Modi’s Hindu nationalist government.
Goodness knows, democracy has its flaws, and there is a temptation to think that a strong leader would make things work better — “make the trains run on time”, in the notorious phrase applied to Mussolini.
Then there is always pressure on democracy from powerful economic forces. Marx said that democracy meant no more than “the opportunity of deciding once in three or six years which member of the ruling class was to misrepresent the people”. Today, we might want to qualify this, and talk not about a ruling class, but about a global economic elite who are able to pressurise governments.
IN THE course of history, the Church has justified almost every form of government, from the divine right of kings to the latest military junta; so it is proper to be sceptical and ask why democracy has any special claim on the Christian conscience. After all, it was not until Pope Leo XIII, in the late 19th century, that the papacy accepted that democracy might align itself with Christian values.
It was Reinhold Niebuhr, in The Children of Light and the Children of Darkness, who gave the classic Christian defence of democracy. There, he wrote: “Man’s capacity for justice makes democracy possible; but man’s inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary.”
Our capacity for justice enables us, at least some of the time, to think of the common good, not only our own interests, and to work for the good of all, not just for ourselves. But, as Niebuhr said, our inclination to injustice should make us suspicious of all centres of power, and keep us vigilant that they do not become tyrannies.
Luther knew well that we have this inclination to injustice; indeed, he thought of human beings as wild animals who needed the strong cage of the State to stop them from tearing one another to pieces. What he ignored was the fact that the State itself is the biggest beast of all and needs its own strong cage.
It is from this inclination to injustice that there arises the classic separation of powers in democracy: the judiciary, the executive, and the legislature. The executive — that is, the government of the day — is held in check by an independent judiciary and an elected assembly.
Until recently, in this country, we failed the test of a separation of powers, because the Law Lords sat in the House of Lords, and the Lord Chancellor was not only head of the judiciary, responsible for appointing judges, but a member of both the legislature and the Cabinet. That all changed in 2005 with the Constitution Reform Act, and in 2009, when the Supreme Court came into existence.
The key point is the real independence of the judiciary. In Russia, as was seen in the case of Alexei Navalny and countless others, the judicial system operates according to what Putin wants — in Navalny’s case, his imprisonment and death (News, 23 February 2024). This means that any attack on the judiciary, such as the Daily Mail headline “Enemies of the people”, in 2016, undermines a fundamental pillar of democracy.
No less important is freedom of the media. Sadly, what we see in so many countries is the media being controlled, either directly or though allies, by the government. Social media have made a big difference in keeping the possibility of truth alive, but here, again, they can be controlled or subject to vast attempts at misinformation.
NO DOUBT many of those one in five who would rather have a strong unelected leader take that view because they have not actually lived under a repressive regime. But, more crucially, they have not had the requisite teaching at school.
Schools are meant to teach citizenship education, but a House of Lords committee found that, while a few schools did this well, most were failing badly. They either subsumed it under spiritual, moral, social, and cultural values, or did not teach it at all. This is not good enough.
Our society is founded on certain fundamental political values, and pupils should know what they are and why they matter so much. This is closely linked to the whole question of fundamental British values. A flawed version of these were brought in as a response to terror threats, and it is mandatory for schools to teach them.
My Private Member’s Bill, which was passed in the Lords, but still has to be taken up in the Commons, has a much more balanced and holistic view (News, 25 October 2024). This states that our values are democracy, the rule of law, freedom, individual worth, and respect for the environment.
“Freedom” includes freedom of thought, conscience, and religion; freedom of expression; and freedom of assembly and association. “Individual worth” means respect for the equal worth and dignity of every person. “Respect for the environment” is defined as taking into account the systemic effect of human actions on the health and sustainability of the environment, both in the UK and the planet as a whole, for present and future generations.
Democracy around the world is under threat. It matters desperately that citizens of our country understand the fundamental political values on which our society is based, and why they are so crucial.
Democracy is a fragile achievement, the result of centuries of struggle and conflict. It is far from perfect, and our present form of democracy is not the last word on the subject. As has been well said, it is the worst system in the world except for all the others. But, flawed as it is, we need to guard and protect it. It needs to be taught in our schools.
The Rt Revd Lord Harries of Pentregarth is a former Bishop of Oxford. His books include Faith in Politics? Rediscovering the roots of our political values (Darton, Longman & Todd, 2014).