Democracy and the Crisis

Radio Record, Volume V, Issue 44, 13 May 1932, Page 1

Democracy

and the

Crisis

A Talk from 3YA by

L. C.

WEBB

NE of the comfortable beliefs of the nineteenth century was that democratic government would go on spreading till it embraced the whole earth. The belief was excusable. Each of the century’s revolutions saw a few more countries endowed with Parliamentary constitutions, and it was natural to conclude that the progress of democracy was one of the inevitable processes of human evolution. . Cot is, therefore, rather surprising to find that the world, and Europe in particular, is much less democratic than it was 30 years ago, and that the reaction against democracy is gathering force. The reason is fairly simple. In the nineteenth century politics was confined to politics; nowadays politics has got tangled up with economics. Every voter can-reasonably be expected to have an opinion on such questions as the extension ( of the franchise, relations with Ireland, or religion in schools. But these are questions which have been settled long ago. The real questions in politics to-day are economic questions, and in these it is rare that the electorate can pronounce

on them intelligently. Tt is aiso rare that Par--liaments can deal with them intelligently. This change in the subject matter of polities has been going on for 50 years, and for 50 years democracy has been growing less and less effective. But it is only the severe impact of the financial crisis that has made us realise how utterly incompetent those institutions are. As an illustration of the failure of democratic institutions I might point to the existence of dictatorships in so many European States, but I want to call attention to a less noticeable and therefore more dangerous aspect of the decay of democracy that has been revealed by the crisis. The crisis has not so far upset any Parliamentary Governments, but it has sapped their vitality and left them as mere shams. Germany, where the crisis began, has nominally a Parliamentary Government. In fact, the present German Government has been kept in office by the President and not by popular will. And it is legislating, not by Parliamentary processes, but by decree, under the emergency. (Continued on page 2.),

Democracy and the Crisis

(Continued from page 1) In the Parliaments of the Empire there has been no such open suspension of normal government, but in all of them you will find that legislation by Order-in-Council is freely resorted to, and that the right of debate has been considerably curtailed. Speaking of the measures taken in the British Parliament to deal with the crisis, Professor Laski says: ‘The Government has overthrown at a stroke the result of the historic struggle in this country to place the control of expenditure in the hands, not of the Executive, but of Parliament. The conventions of the British Constitution have not been more violently outraged in our time." The freedom of the electors has been as much curtailed as the’ freedom *of members of Parliament. At least th countries in the Empire have set up what are called national Governments. That is, groups of political leaders hare said to the electors, "We want 2 free hand to deal with the crisis. We will not tell you what we are going to do, but we ask for your complete confidence." And the bewildered electors have, in effect, given these men a free hand. Jt is fair to say that such elections are not free, democratic elections, and that the result of them is to set up a mild form of dictatorship. The keystone of democratic government is the responsibility of the elected representative to the people, but there can be no effective responsibility if the elected representative makes no promises which he can be held accountable for. There is oue other aspect of these National Governments worth noting, aud that is that the members geneYally quarrel among themselves. That is only natural. The Ministers belong to different political parties, and sooner or later they will disagree on fundamental issues. The present British Cabinet is split on the Free Trade issue, and although, by a rather unique arrangement, they have agreed to differ, I think you will admit that such a fundamental disagreement seriously damages the efficiency of Cabinet, and must ultimately destroy it. tC have said that as a result of the crisis, the freedom of members of Parliament, and of the electors. has been seriously curtailed. But what is more serious, the freedom of Goyernments themselres bas been I am merely stating what is his when I say that there is hardly a Goyernment in the world to-day that bas not, at some time in the last 12 months, had to do what the bankers told it to do. The bankers told Mr. MacDonald’s Labour Government that if a joan was to be raised, the rates of unemployment relief would have to be cut. The Labour Government was unable to agree to this and had to resign. As a result of this sort of thing. the phrase "bankers’ ramp" has been coined. and some people have talked as if the bankers were in a conspiracy to defeat the will of democracy. I think this is a foolish way of looking at what happened. The bankers were as much distressed as the Government were, and they took reasonable and . (Continued on page 21.)

Democracy and the Crisis (Continued from page 2.) necessary measures to safeguard their investments. Nor is it any use to say to the bankere. "Hands off politics." That is

not possible, or even desirable. indeed, if you read the speeches of the great Finglish bankers I think you. will agree that they have a far clearer idea than the politicians have of what is wrong with the world and what steps are necessary for a financial recovery. The bankers’ are in some ways our truest internationalists, and it is a pity they are not listened to ’ more than they are. Nevertheless, the intervention of . bankers in politics is something we ‘cannot ignore, if democracy is to have a future. An Oxford economist said recently: "It has been clear for years past that by force of circumstances the pankers who are, constitutionally speaking, private individuals, have been compelled to assume what are in effect political responsibilitiees in international] and national politics. This anomalous situation cannot continue. Some way must be found for constitutionalising the banks. The present arrangement is intolerable for a self-governing country like our own."

This problem is part of a greater problem-the problem of how demoeratic institutions are to be so organised as to be able to cope with the economic difficulties that .beset them. If that problem is not solved, many countries are doomed to follow the precedent of Italy and Russia. "It is encouraging to find, however. that people were beginning to tackle the problem before the crisis began. It would be interesting, if there were time, to study the efforts made by various countries since the war to set up Economic Councils to assist their Parliaments in dealing with economic problems. Germany has a large represen:

has a similar, though smaller body. Britain is experimenting with an advisory council of economists. And practically all the new constitutions of Nurope ' have provision for similar bodies. Not many of these experiments have succeeded, but there is much to be learnt from the failures. Moreover, the crisis has had at least one beneficial effect: it has taught us how valuable the economists are. The lesson has been learnt a little late. In * future, perhaps, the State will regard

the economists as its permanent advisers, not as experts in first aid. In conclusion, let me say this: It is not only foolish but dangerous to expect that after the depression is over, the National Governments will be dishanded and Parliamentary government will go on just as before. One of the causes of the present crisis is the blundering inefficiency of Parliaments when confronted with economic problems: and we must cure that ineffi-

ciency. We will not cure it merely by inventing new institutions and changing existing ones. The old political parties, whose roots are in the 19th century, must bring themselves into line with the times.

A member of the Jast Labour Ministry in Britain said that Labour is office failed because it had not done any serious thinking on economic problems since the war. The Labour Party is not exceptional in that. There is not a political party in the Empire which has an economic policy relevant to the present situation. The real issues of to-day cut across party divisions, with the result that elections are fought on questions that have long ago ceased to be questions. We are trying to solve the problems of the 20th century with the methods of the 19th century.