Democracy Under Capitalism

Democracy is bound by the interests of capital under the capitalist system if democracy
cannot serve the interests of the ruling class, it will be sacrificed before those
interests will (see: Nazi Germany, Mussolini's Italy, Pinochet in Chile 1973,
Suharto's regime Indonesia after 1965). Shown by the capitalist revolutions
against monarchs that have taken place... French revolution and American War for
independence ruling class uses radical language to justify their position,
highlighting human rights and the equality of all, however subjegate the masses
when they know they can get away with it. In 1660, one parliamentarian in
London was explicit in his justification of the reinstatement of Charles II as head
of state: The government of a king though tyrannical is far better than the
usurping tyranny of many plebeians.
Parliamentary democracy justifies itself by giving voters a choice of a few candidates for
a position, the competition for these positions legitimising the candidate who wins
them as the best for the role however the choices are of course limited (for one,
can only run for a position if you have the time and resources to).
Rights of property will always be above any other giving the state the right to strip
the human rights of those who violate this number one law under capitalism.
Parliamentary democracy does not dictate what is produced and for what reason while
capitalist democracy purports itself as exerting control, it is the ruling class, who
own the means of production, that dictate the lives of millions of workers.
When capitalism is in crisis it will resort to austerity, pushed through parliament,
sacrificing the living standards of the masses to ensure the ruling class' massive
wealth can be retained.
Public opinion on our democracy.... Just 42 percent of people 18-29 years old agree
with the statement Democracy is preferable to any other kind of government.
One in five thinks that it doesnt matter what kind of government we have; one in
three agrees that, sometimes, a non-democratic government could be preferable.
..Three-quarters agreed that Democracy is not working because there is no real
difference between the policies of the major parties and Democracy only serves
the interests of a few and not the majority of society. Sixty-four percent agreed in
some way with the statement I have become disillusioned with Australian
politics and think another system might work better.
When the ruling class and those in the parties that represent them cannot push through the
brutal reforms they want to they will criticise democracy and the masses who are
too stupid to know how society really works (Tom Elliot: ...it would be preferable
to appoint a committee of eminent and competent Australians to sort [society]
out. A benign dictatorship if you will. )
In line with this, the ruling class of Europe have taken a hard stance against the election
of SYRIZA in Greece pushed the idea that a victory for the anti-austerity
party in Greece would lead to economic collapse across the rest of Europe; sought
to humiliate the party once elected... Pushed the idea Greece must suspend
democracy so that the people don't make the wrong decision.
In Australia, which is not in economic crisis, the ruling class takes a different approach
for eg. The Commission of Audit last year which informed the Liberals budget,
calling for massive cuts to social spending after predicted a future debt crisis. It
isn't the rich who must bail Australia out, it's all those who benefit from our
healthcare, education and welfare system. Ruling class can push these ideas
through media ownership (Daily Telegraph persisting with the idea that Australia

is heading towards crisis and that the poor must pay). When the people reject
these claims, the likes of Tom Elliot call for a technocratic dictatorship.