In Western countries, we tend to think highly of ourselves: we are great, democratic nations – indeed, we have the best system of government of all. Yet Oagal takes a closer look at the global reality, where the world’s leading democracies are failing – with the banner of democracy waving self-satisfied at the top.
Do we really still have a democracy in Norway, the editorial team asks itself. Do these failing democracies not resemble the encyclopedic descriptions of anarchies more closely?
Traditionally, anarchy is associated with chaos, lawlessness, or the absence of governing authorities. According to Wikipedia’s description of anarchy, the concept has several different but related meanings:
In political theory, anarchy is described as a condition in which no legitimate authority controls the whole, and where power is distributed through chance, relationships, or strategic skill in the use of power. Oagal regularly observes precisely such a reality, where citizens, politicians, business interests, NGOs, and public administration alike express frustration with processes and outcomes – even though there is no doubt that power is supposed to rest with elected bodies.
Everyone, quite simply, blames everyone else.
Read more: The need to continue the anarchists’ struggle against extensive state power and bureaucracy
The reality is that we are facing a situation no longer governed by laws and voters – but by structures, procedures, and individuals who know how to use them, without courts intervening. This also includes political parties, as seen in Oslo, which openly deviate from their own party ideology when it suits them best. At the same time, party colleagues in the Parliament building a few hundred meters away step in front of cameras to deliver noble-sounding attacks on deliberate lies from the party governing the country – a party different from those distorting reality in the capital’s city hall.
Oagal concludes that:
Read also: Changes of government create no change
A clear example is the district reform in Oslo. It is presented as a boost for local democracy.
In reality, it entails:
This is not merely poor citizen participation, but a distortion of democracy: a language that claims to strengthen participation while actual power is moved beyond the people’s reach.
Read also: How Oslo municipality evaded legally mandated citizen participation for residents in Skøyen without anyone intervening
Call it lies, propaganda, pragmatism, decisiveness – but it is certainly not a knowledge-based democratic process. It appears that the governing parties’ ideology bends to power logic, governance efficiency, and adaptation to today’s political landscape – including weak party leadership. This opens the door to opportunism everywhere, including in Oslo.
A bureaucratized or technocratic system can function without genuine popular participation and still appear democratic on the surface, as Max Weber described it: “A modern bureaucracy can be so self-sustaining that it effectively becomes a ruling class – without ever having been elected.”
If legislation and procedures live lives of their own, and politics is reduced to party changes at the top of an apparatus that does not change course, then it is reasonable to ask: Does Norway have a system of popular rule – or do we have an anarchistic system governed by administrative logic and personal positioning?
Read also: Can we trust the EIU Democracy Index?
Even the Norwegian political industry with a large public sector has long moved too far away from the people and become an exponent of politician-driven political extremism. Oagal poses the question: Is Norway, to a large extent, an anarchy without the election of politicians – but of parties – and with forms and consultations instead of popular rule with real separation of powers?
De fleste av artiklene på Oagal er utarbeidet av redaksjonen. Innholdet fra redaksjonen er det fortløpende redaksjonelle arbeidet i Oagal. Redaksjonen driver undersøkende journalistikk, utvikler ideer til saker og utarbeider artikler ved hjelp av ulike tilgjengelige kilder og verktøy. Meningsbærende innhold og også reportasjer bærer skribentens navn.
0 Comments