few days ago, an older person myself, who was in Chile during the military coup, I said it was "thanks to him that had the freedoms we now enjoy." This is partly true, because it was thanks to people like this guy, who voted not to follow the military government, which are now in a society where there is no absolute censorship of opinion, that young people have the possibility have a voice and that Chile is a democracy.
Democracy? Are we really a democracy? Of course, we are voting participation, we are able to choose those who govern us and participate in our civil society. Sure we are a democracy! Or not?
thing for me is not so clear. The word "democracy" no longer means only "the opposite of dictatorship." For many Chileans, I know, still is. So it is a well kept and worshiped as a sacred, anything is better than a military dictatorship.
But is it really so "sacred" democracy? Is it something untouchable, incriticable? I would think not. In fact, I'd like to think nothing is untouchable, that nothing is certain. But talking specifically about democracy, I think it is anything but something that can not speak, criticize, comment or find faulty.
Why I say that democracy is a "flawed"? Mainly because my college concept of democracy, as I said, has changed significantly. I think the simple fact of having an option to vote and not have a dictator at the head of government is not enough to say we live in a "real" democracy.
first define who is "real democracy" then. The basic idea is a participatory government, right? But who is involved? Until this question Aristotle in "Politics" "Involved the masses? Do the rich? Do more merit? The answer seems clear. In fact, it seems that the issue is not so black / white as it might seem. Thus, we can see that democracy is not uniform, unchanging or constant for all states.
In the case of Chile, democracy should mean more than the ability to vote. We need to say that we live in a democracy as such. It is true that we recover the possibility to be back in democracy, with the plebiscite of '89, but is not sure we have a good democracy.
So what we need? I think the answer is on participation more informed citizen more aware and greater participation responsible for deciding. In addition, we must change the way we do politics in our country. If there is 1 / 3 of the country is not voting, it is about something. People do not identify with the systems and institutions that are considered in the Chilean political world. You need to renew the way of doing politics, political parties, the politicians themselves. It is difficult, almost impossible to tell, because when someone has the power of the status quo, and does not want engolocina drop. But at least that try ...
Finally, I think it is the responsibility of everyone, even those who are not registered, be informed of what's happening in the politics of our country. Saying "I do not care" only reflects that there is an awareness of what politics in our lives. If "not interested" to have someone in power that might pose or make decisions for you without consulting you, then I think you must be a person too submissive. Of course, I think the answer is not necessarily vote, because as I said the participation in democracy not only demonstrated by the vote. But it is valid to know who is in power, know what decisions they take, how affect our lives and our communities, how can you criticize or contact these authorities, how they can push, how they can break up if necessary. That is something that should be emphasized to the people since they have more awareness of the society in which they live, the responsibility and power that have in democracy. This is an educational topic and a topic for another discussion ... But for now, we agreed that there is much work as a country and a lot of work as citizens. Hands!
thing for me is not so clear. The word "democracy" no longer means only "the opposite of dictatorship." For many Chileans, I know, still is. So it is a well kept and worshiped as a sacred, anything is better than a military dictatorship.
But is it really so "sacred" democracy? Is it something untouchable, incriticable? I would think not. In fact, I'd like to think nothing is untouchable, that nothing is certain. But talking specifically about democracy, I think it is anything but something that can not speak, criticize, comment or find faulty.
Why I say that democracy is a "flawed"? Mainly because my college concept of democracy, as I said, has changed significantly. I think the simple fact of having an option to vote and not have a dictator at the head of government is not enough to say we live in a "real" democracy.
first define who is "real democracy" then. The basic idea is a participatory government, right? But who is involved? Until this question Aristotle in "Politics" "Involved the masses? Do the rich? Do more merit? The answer seems clear. In fact, it seems that the issue is not so black / white as it might seem. Thus, we can see that democracy is not uniform, unchanging or constant for all states.
In the case of Chile, democracy should mean more than the ability to vote. We need to say that we live in a democracy as such. It is true that we recover the possibility to be back in democracy, with the plebiscite of '89, but is not sure we have a good democracy.
So what we need? I think the answer is on participation more informed citizen more aware and greater participation responsible for deciding. In addition, we must change the way we do politics in our country. If there is 1 / 3 of the country is not voting, it is about something. People do not identify with the systems and institutions that are considered in the Chilean political world. You need to renew the way of doing politics, political parties, the politicians themselves. It is difficult, almost impossible to tell, because when someone has the power of the status quo, and does not want engolocina drop. But at least that try ...
Finally, I think it is the responsibility of everyone, even those who are not registered, be informed of what's happening in the politics of our country. Saying "I do not care" only reflects that there is an awareness of what politics in our lives. If "not interested" to have someone in power that might pose or make decisions for you without consulting you, then I think you must be a person too submissive. Of course, I think the answer is not necessarily vote, because as I said the participation in democracy not only demonstrated by the vote. But it is valid to know who is in power, know what decisions they take, how affect our lives and our communities, how can you criticize or contact these authorities, how they can push, how they can break up if necessary. That is something that should be emphasized to the people since they have more awareness of the society in which they live, the responsibility and power that have in democracy. This is an educational topic and a topic for another discussion ... But for now, we agreed that there is much work as a country and a lot of work as citizens. Hands!
