Democracy is in Danger (but we can rescue it)
Raising Living Standards, Reducing Carbon Emissions, and Investing in Defence is what we need to do
Our democracy, like those across the world, is in danger. Citizens here are losing faith in democracy as they cannot earn enough to live, and we are also threatened by Putin’s aggression in Europe. Dealing with both is the only way to save democracy.
We can only protect democracy by making sure people have enough to live now (by raising living standards) and in the future (by reducing carbon emissions). We can only protect our nation by building our armed forces. Doing all three – raising living standards, reducing carbon emissions, and building our armed forces – is the only way to protect our democracy.
Figure 1: How We Protect Our Democracy
1. Rising living standards today (so people know democracy delivers)
Democracies are internally divided, as those who cannot earn enough for a decent life are losing faith in our democratic system. Declining faith in democracy is a story of declining living standards. Dissatisfaction with democracy rose when living standards fell - during the financial crisis of 2008-10 and then dramatically again in the post-COVID cost of living crisis. When we look at which people and places are losing faith in democracy, it is those who are unable to earn a decent life. Non-graduates who can’t get jobs that pay a decent wage, the young who cannot afford homes like their parents did, and postindustrial areas that can’t provide enough good jobs for those who live there.
If we want democracy to endure, we must give people reason to have faith in democracy. That starts with raising living standards so everyone can earn enough for a decent life. Creating good non-graduate jobs so everyone can earn a decent living, building more houses for the young, and lowering energy costs by investing in clean energy.
2. Reducing carbon emissions (to protect future living standards)
The largest threat to long-term prosperity is our carbon emissions. If we do not stop emitting carbon, it will destroy our standard of living and destroy democracy in the process. More carbon means more 40 degree heatwaves that kill thousands. More carbon means more flooding, which costs our economies more than the cost of preventing the carbon being emitted in the first place. It is at least three times cheaper for us to invest to prevent climate change now than to continue on our current path. There is no choice between living standards and net zero. We either have both or we will end up with neither.
The actual cost of climate change is likely to be much higher than we are currently predicting. A burning planet means fewer resources in the poorest areas of the world, and people fighting over what little is left. Failing harvests, droughts, and dying herds in the Sahel are leading to more conflicts. Those conflicts are literally coming to our shores as boats across the channel.
3. Investing in our defence (so we can guarantee our security)
We are also now externally threatened by conflict. If Putin believes Europe to be too weak to resist him, then the peace we have taken for granted could end. The peace of the past 80 years rested upon three foundations – strong armed forces (in the form of NATO), sacrosanct borders that could not be redrawn by force, and democracies that would never vote to fight one another. All three are now at risk.
Putin has transformed Russia into a wartime nation, one whose economy is geared toward maximising the production of fighting forces. Preventing future conflicts requires showing Putin we have the resources and resolve to defeat him. It means rearming Europe so that Putin knows that invading another nation would mean certain defeat.
If Putin believes, like dictators before him, that Europe cannot or will not withstand him, he is more likely to invade. A future war will cost us far more than building our armed forces now to deter that conflict. Crudely, investing now to show Putin we can defeat him will cost us less, in both blood and money.
If Putin invades another European nation, it risks a Great Power War, where the most powerful states mobilise their entire societies to fight each other. These wars are horrific on a scale we cannot imagine. In 2023, around 150,000 died in all the world’s conflicts. In World War II, the world’s last Great Power War, 12.5 million died every year.
Figure 2: Deaths in Great Power Wars are magnitudes worse than the conflicts we see today.
Source: Our World in Data
If we want our democracy, and those around the world to endure, we must act. We must give people a reason to have faith in democracies by ensuring they earn enough to live. That starts with raising living standards today so people can earn enough today and reducing carbon emissions so they can continue to earn enough in the decades to come. At the same time, we must protect our nation by investing in our own defence to prevent horrific conflicts in the years to come. This is how we protect our democracy. This is what we must do.
This article also appeared in Progressive Britain.
On the issue of defence, I agree that we must invest more in deterrence and it may be necessary for the government to justify breaking its commitment on taxation if Trump abandons the NATO commitments of the USA. I believe this would be adequate justification. That said I would hope the Government would put more thought into how it raises those taxes and the effects they have on the economy. Raising employers N. I. contributions, at the same time as raising the minimum wage and bringing in more regulation relating to employment, is not a good strategy if you want to encourage private enterprise investment.
In relation to defence, I am concerned that if we do spend more, it may not be spent wisely. I have read articles criticising the Ukraine military for not utilising NATO doctrine of speed, aggression and outmanoeuvre. This just doesn't work on a battlefield dominated by drones that provide 100% observation (largely preventing surprise attacks) and have proved to be much more cost effective at taking out armour and personnel. Rather than invest in tanks, we should probably be investing in millions of drones. As usual the concern has to be that our Generals are thinking about fighting the last war, rather than the technology of the next one.
This is all correct, however I feel like we're missing a few key levers and they're more immediate.
1. The UKs undemocratic system is problematic - defending something where a party can win a 'majority' but represent minority views isn't good. It means the actions of the government don't represent the views of the population.
2. Politicians are seen as extremely out of touch with public opinion. The Labour party has a duty to right that wrong. Episodes like the MPs on the whatsapp chat belittling their constituents just plays into this. Silly policy choices that leave the government open to charges of not caring (whether justified or not) need to be thought about from the viewpoint of how the population (through the eyes of a right wing press, because that's what we have) will perceive every single action.
If the current government does not tackle these problems, it will make Nigel Farage the next PM, and democracy will be over before any of the things you are talking about are tackled. I'm seriously worried by the lack of common sense.