Democracy is best?

Winston Churchill famously told the House of Commons in 1947:

"No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time."

I was reminded of this, given the enormous difficulty we're having getting the will of the people carried out in the current debate over health care reform and climate change legislation. In both, there are powerful forces (translated, money) opposing progressive change because of the special interests of corporate profits. Business v. the people -- with government going to the highest bidder.

In contrast, it's much easier to get some of these things done in a dictatorship or an oligarchy -- if you have benevolent rulers and if they make decisions based on what's best for the country. Both very huge IF's in this world.

Nevertheless, look at what's just happening in China on alternate energy. Just months after being publicized as the greatest looming threat to pollution of the atmosphere because of its vast demands for new energy, today's New York Times has a story about China's great leap ahead of us, "Green Power Takes Root in the Chinese Desert:"

As the United States takes its first steps toward mandating that power companies generate more electricity from renewable sources, China already has a similar requirement and is investing billions to remake itself into a green energy superpower. . . .

While the House of Representatives approved a requirement last week that American utilities generate more of their power from renewable sources of energy, and the Senate will consider similar proposals over the summer, China imposed such a requirement almost two years ago.

This year China is on track to pass the United States as the world’s largest market for wind turbines -- after doubling wind power capacity in each of the last four years. State-owned power companies are competing to see which can build solar plants fastest, though these projects are much smaller than the wind projects. And other green energy projects, like burning farm waste to generate electricity, are sprouting up.

There's something to be said for the efficiency of a government that doesn't have to contend with profit-driven obstructions to progress, that can simply act for the good of all and implement changes without prolonged wrangling debate.

On the other hand . . . with only a small shift in the priorities of a few leaders, it could go completely the other way. So I'll stick with our system.

But it would be better if we could get rid of the undue influence of corporate money and truly have a government of the people, for the people, and by the people.

Something to ponder this weekend as we celebrate our independence. Just how independent are we? Is being ruled indirectly by corporate greed better than being ruled by inherited royalty or by ideology? Whose ideology? How do you balance the need to limit money influence and the rights of free speech? Does money given to lawmakers really come under the rubric of protected free speech? That's the legal argument of those who oppose campaign finance reforms.

Churchill was right. It's a mess. But so far we've found nothing better.

Ralph