Se ha denunciado esta presentación.
Utilizamos tu perfil de LinkedIn y tus datos de actividad para personalizar los anuncios y mostrarte publicidad más relevante. Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de publicidad en cualquier momento.

Gordana Comic, Deputy speaker NARS Reintroducing ethics in politics

130 visualizaciones

Publicado el

PSA Nottingham, UK

Publicado en: Noticias y política
  • Sé el primero en comentar

  • Sé el primero en recomendar esto

Gordana Comic, Deputy speaker NARS Reintroducing ethics in politics

  1. 1. GORDANA COMIC PSA Annual International Conference 2019 (UN)SUSTAINABLE POLITICS IN A CHANGING WORLD Strengthening Parliamentary Democracy PANEL REINTRODUCING ETHICS IN POLITICS Absence of ethics and moral corruption Trust, accountability and rule of law are three corners of any social pyramid that we build for the sake of certainty for development, economical and political freedom and basic decency of life on daily basis for each and every citizen. Ethics in politics is indispensible for the existence of all three “corners of society”, without any ethics there is huge empty space that is very quickly invaded by populism, hatred, extremism and uncertainty that is spread around like a virus. That is the point where fear management starts and where everyone devoted to rule of law, accountability and trust in institutions of society starts to be mocked around. Instead of politics made on ethical stand points and politicians who are dream builders and reality producers we start to build, in chaos, a kind of kitsch in politics that should replace all our social and public values. That is how moral corruption start to be acceptable and frequent on places where it should not be present. That is how we forget the beauty of trust and true values and then find ourselves in époque of crisis of everything what we used to believe and care for, what we thought is there for eternity. Why does it happen? Why we tend to forget how hard it was for generations to build trust and accountability in society? And how we can reintroduce ethics in politics and decrease moral corruption that will deny our development? Times are changing, but ethics in politics should not be “old habit that died” We should fight for it. Why ethics is almost expelled from politics?
  2. 2. First of all we should remind ourselves what does it mean to have, cherish and promote ethical code in society, how it differs from moral code or morality as a whole, where does it come from and why it seems nowadays that we all are lacking some ethical verticals that would keep the fabric of our societies together and all of us certain of what is proper thing to stand for and what most certainly is not. In different societies it comes from different sources, but if we would try to close our eyes and travel through time all the way to the beginning of human kind we could see a bright line of never stopped storytelling thrown in time like message in the bottle to the sea of eternity. We don’t know who, how and when begun storytelling but the magic lasts. The best of all stories we embedded in legends, myths, religion books, tribal heritage and history of our societies. Our identity can be found in some storytelling that can be easily proved to be very similar in every corner of our globe. We, the humans, share the basics of what is good and what is evil, what is moral and what is not, what is acceptable and what is not, however locally it may look different. At some point of history we started to write down in laws everything what we agreed that should be ethical, acceptable for society and punished if not respected. Basically, laws were wrote and “given to the people” to ban any behavior based on what society said was improper leaving people to think of that what ever they wanted, but everybody must act according to what was written in laws. Through last couple of hundred years we established democracy, political parties, rights and freedoms for all people, elections and institutional rule of law that should enable stability, economic development, stability and prosperity for every member of society. It did not happen at the same time everywhere in the world, on the contrary we who live in different societies still share the space but we do not share the époque of development, strength of democracy or level of rule of law established. If we focus on few last decades we can clearly see how “times are changin’” as Nobel Prize winner Bob Dylan used to sing. It was kind of a small miracle hearing that Bob Dylan won a Nobel Prize, but on the other hand, he wrote a line “Times, they are changin’” and with that line he described our époque, so he might very well deserved that prize. How and why changes took place? What triggered them and are they good or bad?
  3. 3. The second question is easier and the answer is “nobody knows yet”, but one thing is for sure changes in political landscape in the world are here to stay, so let’s deal with it, let us all put some effort to understand what is going on, exactly. I would offer times when political parties were formed and start to shape Europe some 100 or 150 years ago – what people thought of that at the time? It looks like they liked it, it looks like they felt that political parties and elected representatives will do something for better and for good, something for common goods and rights and freedom for the people. And they did, political parties managed to offer some answers to the people during the hard times and good times, during wars and peace, destructions and developing time in societies. Political parties changed agendas of the societies, were progressive in gender issues, environment, dialogue, cross parties cooperation and a lot of other issues. So, when and how political parties lost momentum in XXI century? When and where was that tipping point for the people, the point they realized that parties do not hear them, do not see them and how people decided to put trust in movements, ad hoc groups without structures and program, to put trust and faith in sometimes angry individuals instead to classic political parties? When and how the basic ethics embedded in all of the parties started to blur instead of being the light and clearness? What was the moment when accountability started to have interpretations, when all the pillars of society started to shake announcing the age of uncertainty, mistrust, movements, the age of crisis of ideas and crisis of leaders in politics? There may be two main parameters combined in creation of context that we live nowadays. FIRST parameter: Speed of exchange of information accelerated by internet and social media left almost all democratic institutions, political parties and the way we represent people behind, we in the system that was created to be accountable and trusted, we all started being too slow and bordered with procedures consuming time and slower we were it was harder to catch up, the space was already occupied with movements and individuals. Not just because political parties did not have the answers for the people, but because they were too slow to respond. So, in a kind of a paradox, movements are there because political parties and institutions were not. Movements were just and right respond for people with fears, anger, for life in the age of uncertainty. And often they offered “easy and light solutions” in the “land of milk and honey where there are no political parties” When political parties finally catches up they said “o, people want that kind of rhetoric’s, fine!” and that how more or less populism was gloriously born, from the worst of parties and worst of movements.
  4. 4. And there where populism rules there can’t be any ethics, it is removed and vanishes because “populism can do everything without any ethical code” it is all emotional communication feeding the worst emotions possible. For half of XX century we had political parties, civic society and citizens as partners in state building, establishing rule of law, free media, market economy and coping with burden of the past, war crimes, unresolved issues and reconciliation across the Europe. We believed in the beauty of European idea, in that highly appreciated idea of sitting around the table and construct your own future through the dialogue however hard it is from time to time. Economic and financial crisis in 2008 dragged whole world back, it dragged EU as well and enabled strong growth of far-right, populism and finally it looked like any to that point ethical code in politics dropped from any EU agenda, too many problems in the core structures of EU, Brexit, migrants, rising atmosphere of narcissism of small differences among countries that produced conflicts almost on daily basis on issue “what kind of EU do we really need and do we need EU at all?” Neither parties nor movements had clear answers. SECOND parameter: One gift of globalization and post global world is often forgotten, and that is the fact that economic and financial power went globally irreversibly and political power stayed local, where “local” is Brussels but also Washington or Moscow. How anyone can be accountable as representative when the key players for economical environment in the country are out of reach? People see us, political representatives; they don’t see global players and we are not able to give them right answers and that is fertile soil for populism with “get our country back!” and rhetoric that only feeds anger and fear among people not giving any solution as well. So, what can I do, as representative to reintroduce political party in its place, to establish partnership with movements, to catch up with social media? The one and only thing that can save our century and that is honesty. Honesty as the first step to reintroduce ethics in politics. We live the age of uncertainty and we should share with the people our ideas about new place for political parties, institutions and representatives, our ideas on how to reform political parties to fit in new context and combat populism, combat old ideas of will for conflicts that once upon a time brought nothing but disaster to everyone. The world we used to know and love does not exist anymore, but basic principles of democracy are alive and kicking and we should stick to them.
  5. 5. How we parliamentarians can do that? How parliamentary democracy can innovate itself, stay the same in basic principles, but fit for XXI century? Is it doable? Every reality is first an imagination, at the beginning, an idea to be transformed in life, on daily basis. That is what political parties do, we are dream builders and reality producers and to stay fit with ability to change and adapt political parties must never stop building dreams and produce reality based on that dreams, if they stop doing it, they die. You can not survive as political party without ideas you carry on as offer and as a dream to voters. Being a populist means that you are nightmare builder and in reality you produce disasters. So, why people love populism than? Knowing from history what happens “after populism”? It is sweet and seductive, it feeds low passion within people, it uses propaganda to make you sure that your dream is already fulfilled, you just need populists to show you how beautiful it is to negatively define everything and everybody else because than you will look better to everyone than you really are. Populism need enemies, fears, needs the perception that everything around you is in danger and that hatred, myths and will to fight is the only possible answer. In Serbia, back in nineties, there was an organization, half a political party half a movement that took populism as a sharp tool to “make the case” for wars, blood shell, atrocities. And they were successful, they did it. The nightmare they shared was that “everybody hates us”, “everybody want to destroy us”, “conspiracy theories” “nationalism”, “everybody is robbing us” “they hate us because we are so much better than anyone else” “blood soil poems” etc. And the reality produced with that nightmare was four wars, more than 100 000 people killed, more than 700 000 refugees and displaced persons, homes lost, infrastructure destroyed, families broken, atrocities and war crimes committed, economy in ruins, society poisoned with hatred, intolerance and shame. Do they regret, do they cope with the reality that was produced? No Populists never do that. If they would have a kind of “ethical axe” in what they carry as an idea, they would not be populists at first place.
  6. 6. How populism grows and why it is accepted? 1. FEAR Populism is not possible without fears spread around, without uncertainty, non-visible future and a picture of danger that is coming to destroy “our way of life”. Fears can also be produced and made by propaganda, so populism can’t stand dialogue, free media, rule of law (however fragile). 2. ENEMIES Everybody different is an enemy. Populism will lie about everybody who doesn’t agree to be frightened and dares to stand up and defend elementary humanity. Whoever is of different ethnicity, religion, origin, language, opinion, attitude is a danger “for our way of life”, is an enemy and everything is allowed to neutralize him, If he or she has a job, than fire him or her, treat their families, play “shame & blame” and smear campaigns if they dare to organize themselves. Humiliate, despise, spit that is a discourse of public language. Arrogant to weaker then himself and humble with more powerful than himself that is true populist. 3. MYTHS There is no populism without myths and that is first rhetoric used, people are familiar with myths of their own narrative, they are omnipresent in tradition and misusing them is the basic tool of populism. Will it be “the myth of Serbs, the oldest tribe” or anything else depends only on geography in which populism emerges. 4. LEGITIMACY Populism needs democracy for the legitimacy. Populist rhetoric is defended as “freedom of speech” at the beginning and they are right to do so. Problem starts when and if they gain power, than they star t to shut down every institute of democracy picturing them as a “danger for our cause”. 5. HATE Populism has to hate something, someone. It doesn’t work without hate spread around. Nationalistic rhetoric in Serbia was all the time “against” someone else who you should hate because of his ethnic origin. When hate starts to be appreciated in society it starts to poison every cell of the society and everlasting propaganda is there to make sure that people will continue to love hate all around. Why do people let populism to affect their lives? They liked it. It is very simple, populist wording is something a lot of people like to hear.
  7. 7. How to combat populism? How to reintroduce new ethical code and rebuild trust in societies that democracy knows what to do? 1) With the one and only cure found and implemented: democracy, rule of law, free media and dialogue. If those tools are strong populist can’t get legitimacy, however they won on any level of election. 2) With improving every sector in society, dealing with any fear people feel and any critics that people have for democratic institutions. People should not be afraid of tomorrow and fear management should be delegitimized as a way to run society- 3) With free media, open to everybody, that will endlessly explain why and how populism is nothing but a nightmare for any society, free media can hold populists accountable with much more efficiency than democratic political parties. Can we erase a wish for populists among people? No. But with sharing experiences of us who have been ruled by populists we can save someone else lifetime. We can avoid tragic mistakes that someone else didn’t. That makes populists very unhappy, insecure and frightened to try again. History of successful societies is history of crisis management and we live in the world where democracy is in crisis, people think that it does not work, does not deliver what it should deliver. Parliaments are there to reaffirm themselves, to regain what truthfully belongs to them. Reforming the way political parties are performing, calming those who are afraid of what future may bring and stick to honesty in communication with the people. We are in parliaments not just to adopt laws and control the government, we are in the parliaments to remember that we stand on the shoulders of generations of people who we don’t know but who fought and die believing in democracy to be the best tool for certainty, stability, prosperity and economical development that will enable economy to grow and inequality in society to drop and decrease. Democratic systems are made to acknowledge all conflicts in the society and to build all mechanisms needed to resolve them, one by one. The conflict we are facing in our époque is there because we are trying to reshape parliamentary democracy without reshaping our own lack of ethics in politics. We all know what we should boldly and bravely stand for; we just need to show it.