sâmbătă, 30 iunie 2018

Difference between tribalism and democracy

Till the end of second civil in England the poor and the weak carried fights for heir lords. Peasants were force to conscript, poor people sold they warrior skills as mercenaries.
Once the parliamentarian regime was established the situation reversed: classes and group of interests fought in parliament using members of parliament. A member of the elite fought with words and persuasion for a group that support him, similar like a king against another king in middle age when they tried to avoid bloodshed between armies.
In this way the conflict was brought from society into parliament.
What happens when you cannot solve the problems in parliament? Like now when a majority ignores all common sense and avoid dialogue with opposition?
The conflict goes into the streets, groups are pitied one against another and they form tribes, which eventually try to kill one each other.
The parliamentarian know each other well and it unlikely that will to kill one each other, while the members of the tribes they don't know each other   and they avoid one each other so the likelyhood that the violence will burst is increasing.
A good parliamentarian regime prevents a civil war.

Niciun comentariu: