What we recognize as real democracy is a harmonizing composition of these
three arenas of life. But as each of these wax or wane, the resultant‘democracy’
will take on a very different complexion. When autonomy is destroyed,
fraternity and technology are still sufficient to produce the peculiar mummery
of‘democracy’that the USSR was so devoted to: the bizarre spectacle of the
elaborate and evidently sincere‘no-choice election’:
Elections are taken very seriously in the Soviet Union...enormous efforts are
expended on the electoral process...the media and officials give extensive, ritualised
coverage to the elections...There are painstakingly detailed rules and regulations
about nominations...and electoral...commissions...that take immense care and
attention to detail—down to the arrangements for fire protection for polling
stations...the secrecy of the ballot is meticulously observed...ballots are not num-
bered or named...Elections are held on Sundays to ensure everyone has the chance to
vote...The great emphasis on the participationin the election makes it an almost anti-
social act to not vote.
(Selections from Karklins 1986, p. 451; Jacobs 1970, p. 64; Hill 1976, p. 592)And there was just one candidate on the ballot.
The moral is plain: the sphere of autonomy is essential to real democracy;
real democracy amounts to one discharge of autonomy. But the sphere of
autonomy is impoverished in Australia, and that impoverishment has stunted
her democratic spirit. This is seen in the boredom Australians seem to display
at the prospect of greater self-direction. Thus in 1978 the Australian Capital
Territory (ACT) rejected self-government by an overwhelming margin; in
1998 the electors of the Northern Territory rejected statehood; and‘new
state’movements in Australia have been feeble. In the constitutional referen-
dum of 1999 Australians were not offered the possibility of directly electing a
president. The election of police commissioners—let alone judges—is totally
unheard of. Thirteen of seventy-six senators in 2016 held their seats without
having been elected by the Australian public, as Senate seats may now be
bequeathed—like so many rotten boroughs—on mid-term retirement.^26 In a
2014 survey (Lowy Institute 2014), only 39 per cent of Australians aged 18 to
29 years agreed to the proposition:‘Democracy is preferable to any other kind
of government’.
The poverty of the democratic spirit in Australia is also manifested in the
stunted conduct of her parliament, an institution that the plaudits of Austra-
lian democracy usually pass over. Yet parliamentary life is the heart of dem-
ocracy. Japan conducted general elections during the Second World War,
(^26) In 1977 section 15 of the Constitution was altered so that senators retiring mid-term would be
replaced forthwith by a person of the same party. Most who supported this seemingly innocuous
revision did not anticipate the consequent deal-making that would shuffle politicians in and out of
Senate seats without the alarm and inconvenience of facing voters.
Australia’s Electoral Idiosyncrasies