Democracy as a Cash Cow: The Elite Feast while the Masses Divide Dung

Eight months ago, my observations about the state of the UK reinforced some of my thoughts when Israel launched an attack on Gaza, destroying the region. I joined numerous demonstrations and engaged in awareness-creating actions, discussion groups, and Twitter spaces. These daily observations of Gaza’s suffering prompted me to reflect on the situation closer to home—not just on how grateful we should be, but on the substantial financial support the UK government has provided to Israel. One would assume that with such expenditure, the UK’s public services would be well-funded. However, the reality is quite different.

Take the economy, for instance. Despite vast sums of money being spent on foreign aid and military support, my friend’s wife had to endure a 10-hour wait in A&E, only to be redirected to another hospital—a stark indication of a healthcare system in crisis. Meanwhile, my son is unable to rent his own apartment because his salary must be three times the yearly rent, highlighting the severe housing affordability issues. Those who marched for Gaza were silenced, reminiscent of the broader suppression of dissent. My nephew, working in a GP practice, has seen a rise in mental health issues due to the dire economic conditions, some leading to attempted suicides. These conditions are exacerbated by the ever-tightening grip on immigration policies, often scapegoated to mask deeper systemic failures. And let’s not forget the environment, where policies are more about political posturing than genuine sustainability. Then comes General Election 2024, and we are told it’s a choice for us? Clearly, the priorities of most governments lie with the elite.

In contemporary global politics, “Democracy” is often a façade for more authoritarian practices. Leaders such as Vladimir Putin in Russia and Narendra Modi in India are frequently labelled as authoritarian despite periodic elections. This critique, however, can extend beyond these borders, suggesting that even established democracies like the United Kingdom exhibit similar authoritarian traits masked by “Democratic procedures.”

Vladimir Putin’s Russia is a prime example of a state where elections take place regularly, yet the political environment remains tightly controlled. Critics argue that despite the existence of electoral processes, the Russian populace lacks genuine political choices and opportunities. The media is largely state-controlled and dissent is stifled. This creates an environment where the elite rule unchallenged, and the democratic process is merely a formality rather than a reflection of true public will.

Similarly, in India, Prime Minister Narendra Modi is known for authoritarianism. Despite being the world’s largest democracy, India under Modi has seen increasing suppression of dissent, a crackdown on free speech, and policies that favour the elite. Elections occur, but the political landscape is shaped by powerful interests that leave little room for genuine engagement from the broader population.

Comparing these examples to present-day Britain reveals unsettling similarities. British citizens head to the polls to cast their votes on the 4th of July, ostensibly choosing their representatives in a democratic system. However, the effectiveness of this choice is debatable. For over two decades, local communities in the UK have endured economic hardship, with declining opportunities and increasing disenfranchisement. Minority groups often find themselves scapegoated for broader societal issues, and accountability for the ruling elite rarely goes beyond superficial apologies. The voice against calling out oppression and aggression in Gaza is whitewashed by a cancel culture, silencing any accountability to be complicit in such crimes.

The essence of democracy has come under scrutiny, as it appears that the real power lies not with the electorate but with an elite class that benefits disproportionately from the system. The choice offered to voters is limited to marking an “X” on a ballot, with little real impact on policy or governance. This raises questions about the true nature of democracy in a system where the same elite continue to wield power, and where economic and social policies favour the few over the many.

The metaphor of a “cash cow” aptly describes democracy. In these democracies, the system is structured to continually produce benefits for the elite, much like a cash cow that yields milk, butter, and cheese for its owner. The masses, however, are left with nothing but the dung—metaphorically representing the economic and social hardships they endure. This stark contrast highlights the disparity between the ruling class and the general populace, where the elite reap the rewards while the majority struggle to get by with what little mess is left over.

The concept of “Authoritarian democracy” seems increasingly relevant. This term describes a political system where democratic processes such as elections exist, but where the actual power dynamics resemble those of authoritarian regimes. The democratic process is reduced to a symbolic gesture, while real decisions and power remain concentrated among a privileged few.

In this light, it becomes apparent that the criticism often directed at Russia and India also applies to the UK. The democratic veneer in these countries does little to disguise the underlying authoritarian tendencies. As such, it is essential to question and critically evaluate the state of democracy worldwide. The idea that democracy is a tool for the elite, providing them with the resources and power while leaving the masses with nothing but the remnants, is a poignant critique that resonates across different political landscapes.

The presence of authoritarian elements within these so-called democratic systems suggests a need for deeper scrutiny of democracy’s track record and present status globally. The labelling of representative democracy, authoritarian democracy, or even constitutional democracy is nothing more than rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. For instance, in Russia, elections occur regularly, but the media is state-controlled and political opposition is often suppressed. In India, the world’s largest democracy, similar trends are observed under Narendra Modi’s leadership, with increasing restrictions on free speech and political dissent. Meanwhile, in the United Kingdom, despite being hailed as a longstanding democracy, the economic disparity and lack of real political choice for the general populace suggest that the system primarily serves the interests of the elite.