Exploring the challenges of democracy in addressing climate change, the influence of media moguls on politicians, and the significance of Citizens' Assemblies in decision-making processes.
Social media polarizes democracy, diminishing faith in democratic institutions.
Global appeal for autocracy challenges democracy's moral superiority.
Democratic responses struggle to balance urgent climate action with political decision-making.
Deep dives
Declining Faith in Democratic Institutions
Survey after survey indicates a decline in faith in democratic institutions due to perceived failures such as Brexit or the selection of politicians like Donald Trump or Boris Johnson. This diminishing trust leads to the belief that democracy divides rather than unites people, especially in the polarized realm of social media.
Democracy vs. Autocracy
The resurgence of autocracy in countries like Russia, Iran, and China has gained favor globally, especially among the younger populations. Surveys across 30 countries, including Western nations, show a significant appeal for strong leaders without elections and even military rule, sparking a debate on whether democracy remains the best and most moral form of government.
Challenges in Tackling Climate Change
The debate on tackling climate change delves into the inadequacies of democratic responses. The delicate balance between responsive democratic mechanisms and the urgent need for decarbonization presents a looming challenge. Merging scientific imperatives with political decision-making calls for innovative institutional and economic transformations.
The Role of Experts in Decision Making
Discussions question the reliance on moral arguments in climate change actions and the potential alienation it brings. Calls to bring in experts for advice or decision-making face scrutiny, highlighting a general reluctance to empower non-expert individuals and shift responsibilities away from democratic processes.
Navigating Political, Moral, and Institutional Waters
The panel explored the complexities of balancing political decisions, moral imperatives, and institutional changes in addressing societal challenges like climate change. The evolving dialogue emphasizes the need for collaborative, transparent, and accountable democratic practices amidst increasing suspicions of political elite motives and public engagement.
Tensions in Democracy and Climate Action
The tensions between democratic processes and the demands for urgent climate action reflect broader uncertainties in navigating societal challenges. The discussions showcase concerns about democratic efficacy, societal trust, and the impact of elitist mistrust on engaging with pressing issues, highlighting the ongoing struggle to align democratic values with immediate global challenges.
It will soon be time to vote in the General Election. A moment for us all to play our part in democracy. The theory is that politicians do their best to get elected, and then do all the right things so they are re-elected next time round. But in practice it can be difficult for governments to do what really needs to be done and still stay in power. A good example is climate change: There is a broad consensus that very urgent action is needed, and yet as the election nears, there's little from the major parties promising radical, decisive action, because they fear that voters don't really want it.
If liberal democracy can’t solve our problems, can it at least unite us around the principle that everyone’s point of view is worth hearing? Well no, not any more. For every listener to good old Radio 4 there are many more who get their news from social media and their opinions from their silo of friends. Is it too cynical to suggest that voters are short-sighted, selfish and stubbornly wrong-headed? And what about the quality of our leaders? Does anyone think our political system is serving up the nation's finest?
Some say our democracy isn’t democratic enough. They fear excessive influence by lawyers, quangos, peers, and press barons. Others applaud activists for challenging the worst excesses of a corrupt Commons. Three cheers, they say, for the unelected European Court of Human Rights and the judges who go easy on civil disobedience while thwarting the Home Office over asylum policy.
Do we still believe that our democracy is morally the least-worst system, when it seems incapable of producing long-term solutions to the most urgent problems? Can we learn anything at all from authoritarian states that seem better at simply getting things done? In this special edition of the Moral Maze, recorded at the Hay Festival, we ask - what is the moral basis for claiming that our version of democracy is superior?
Presenter: Michael Buerk
Producers: Jonathan Hallewell, Peter Everett and Ruth Purser
Editor: Tim Pemberton
Get the Snipd podcast app
Unlock the knowledge in podcasts with the podcast player of the future.
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode
Save any moment
Hear something you like? Tap your headphones to save it with AI-generated key takeaways
Share & Export
Send highlights to Twitter, WhatsApp or export them to Notion, Readwise & more
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode