I’m a bit annoyed today, having been called a fascist and undemocratic - all for deleting comments from my blog.
The main problem has been my post on Macedonia. It was daft of me, of course, not to realise that something I saw as an academic debate has caused a lot of strong feelings on both sides. I was pleased, though, to get well-thought-out posts supporting both Greece and the Republic of Macedonia. I deleted quite a few posts which were racially abusive, because that’s not the kind of thing I want to be seen to approve of. (And, frankly, it is illegal in this country to abuse people on the basis of race or religion.)
Sadly, I wasn’t called a fascist for deleting a racist post - that would have been excellent irony. Rather, it was for deleting the inane comments of one guy who - having posted something which I approved - came back the next day and the day after that merely to say “Why hasn’t anyone replied to my post yet???”. (I hadn’t deleted the responses - there hadn’t been any. Not that many people read this every day!) When I started deleting these one-liners, he began to insult and threaten me. His defense was that it was undemocratic of me to have done this.
Now, I don’t know when this habit started, but it annoys me hugely - people name-drop “democracy” to support any ridiculous thing they feel like doing, including posting pointless, illiterate comments on a website. What does that even mean? There’s no “ruling” going on here; nor do I claim somehow to post only the majority opinion. So, is “undemocratic” just a sort of general insult, thrown at those who prevent people doing exactly what they feel like every minute of the day? What a poor, watered-down term it has become, then.
Just to make this post at least partly classical: it also annoys me when people hark back to the classical origins of their democracy. Firstly, the Athenians would have condemned almost all modern “democracies” as elected oligarchies, ruled by a wealthy few. Elections always favour the rich, nowhere more so than in America, where candidates throw huge amounts of their own money into seemingly endless campaigns. The Athenians knew this, and so disapproved of election as undemocratic.
Secondly, most of the famous Greeks whose works we read were against democracy in any case. Unsurprisingly, it was the poor majority who were most in favour of the system which allowed them power. Plato, in particular, couldn’t understand why ruling was the only occupation for which men were not expected to be trained. That he would probably approve of modern democracies for their level of specialism shows just how much the word has changed in meaning over all that time.
I’ve discovered there’s no real definition of what “democracy” means - it’s more a term that countries use of themselves to try to gain a certain respectability, and then we all have to find our own various criteria with which to measure them. This map illustrates pretty well that it’s by no means a black-and-white classification. As an outsider, I often find the United States hideously undemocratic, but I would certainly admit that there are many worse places.
Even if we can’t decide what it means exactly, democratic/undemocratic shouldn’t be reduced to the level of a general term for praise or blame - if it is, then surely it can’t still be something meaningful for people. I’d heard that blogging was supposed to be this new, “democratic” form of communication - but will anyone actually take it seriously for long if it’s so much of it is so mindless and petty?
Now I shall go to bed, steeling myself for the accusations of fascism which are bound to come my way…