The Assad regime has fallen. Now Syria needs democracy.  This has been an almost universal demand by western leaders following the victory of HTS and other rebel groups in Syria. In addition, leaders demanded the protection of minorities, usually implying the formulation of a constitution. Whether Syria or elsewhere, it is a reflex by western leaders to demand these two benchmarks of any western government to be established. First, democratically elected leaders and second, a constitution which protects minority rights as well as the democratic institutions. But why? Is democracy the best political system? Does it work the same everywhere and in every situation? The western answer is yes.

Democracy as we know it today is a milestone in humanity’s eternal struggle to manage distribution of power in a way that is beneficial (measured by current standards) and addresses challenges such as urbanization, population growth, technological advancements and globalization. Its ability to come to decisions for millions of people while taking into consideration most voices is monumental. Some of the most successful states (using current standards such as life expectancy, GDP per capita and real purchasing power) were and still are democratic. Of course, there are many different forms of democracy but still if you look at the biggest economies today, most of them are democratic, but not all. It comes as no surprise then that many people in western nations consider democracy as the most successful political system. Its success in states across the globe, for instance Japan, Estonia or Costa Rica reinforces the notion that democracy is universally applicable. Democracy is seen as the final evolution of politics. This, of course, is nonsense.

It is nonsense not because I know a better political system but because assuming that any political or economic system is there too last is unrealistic at best. In fact, it is hard to believe that any system the human comes up with will last forever. Given the recent struggles that democratic states face with Trump being elected in the US and several European countries struggling to form governments I believe it is clear that despite being a decent political system, democracy is by far not the final one. And yet people struggle to imagine a viable alternative to democracy. Here is a good point to introduce one of my favourite books and the inspiration for this essay. ‘Capitalist Realism’ by Mark Fischer discusses how and why we cannot conceive a viable alternative to capitalism. Although not as desperate as the issue of alternative economic systems, I believe a similar development is taking place regarding political systems. The inability in western countries to imagine a viable alternative to democratic systems is democratic realism.

I add the western countries because in many non-democratic countries people find it easy to conceive alternative systems and think them viable as well. Thus, the issue is not a global one like capitalist realism but specifically applies to western nations and its people. By western I mean North America, Europe, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zeeland and a few other democracies like Costa Rica which might not be strictly western but due to the vagueness of this term I would add them to the list for this discussion.

In any case the issue of democratic realism in the western world is severe. There are few alternatives to democracy that are currently being lived and most of them are dismissed immediately often for good reason. This means that to develop new ideas for political system we must turn to theory. Here lies the problem. Although there are some people who theorize about new systems or even try them in small communities, the average citizen rarely knows these projects exist. Many non-average citizens do not either do not either. Being able to point at another nation and say, “look how they are doing things, what can we learn from that?” is what inspires reflection about one’s own political system. For most of human history interactions of this kind caused major shifts in political systems. For instance, the European Enlightenment period was in part kickstarted by interactions with radically different political and social systems lived by native Americans. Arguably these interactions, in combination with other factors such as an increasingly powerful merchant class or the rediscovery of ancient Greek authors, brought us democracy in Europe in the first place. All this is to say that we struggle to imagine alternative systems to the one we live in.  Encountering a new system which developed independently from our own is the best and potentially the only good way in which we can truly imagine an alternative because it is real, it is being lived.

Theorizing about new forms of deliberative democracy, council systems or anarchy is destined to remain theory because except for a few experts who develop these theories or live it on a small scale (usually in dependence on systems in which their project is located) nobody can imagine how they might be lived. If we cannot imagine an alternative there might be one, but we will never achieve it. Even many political theorists these days will admit that their ideas for new political systems are more fundamental in nature. What rights should citizens have, how should wealth be distributed and so on. Nobody can (for the time being) create a complete and all-encompassing blueprint for a new political system and neither will they be able to prove that it is functional with complete certainty (or scientific certainty). And even if theorists could, who cares if you cannot see a nation or large group of people live this system and prove that it works.

What we are left with then is the system that we know. It is the only viable one for most people and despite its shortcomings we cannot come up with a good alternative. We make small adjustments here and there and maybe, in a few hundred years, people look back and realize that the systems did change and are now fundamentally different compared to our current ones. Still, a process without a vision or ideal is slow going and arduous. Democratic systems can already feel the strain of it. Things are changing but in tiny steps and without a clear direction. There is no new inspiration for change, no outlook for how things might be different. Thus, any politician regardless of where their political views lie, who promises anything that somewhat resembles a vision, is bound to be attractive to the people. But the only convincing vision is the one being lived. And so, given the lack of viable alternatives, politicians turn to the past. They promise to restore some lost aspects of the old system from 50 years back and although it is quite literally a backwards vision, it works, because people lived it. This is how democratic realism opposes even the change on a small scale and has the potential to undermine democracy itself. Maybe, the times when we still had strong rulers were better than the endless squabbling of politicians today?  Maybe, the times where men held more power were better? Maybe, the times when we didn’t have diversity, immigration and globalization were better? Do you remember these days?  Many do. And so democratic realism becomes a poison to democracy. Without a viable alternative but with a desperate need for a vision, an ideal, something to work towards, the only direction we know is backwards.

I do not know how to change this fact. I would love to pretend that theorizing until we find a convincing vision is the way forward, but I doubt it is. I do see value in projects that try to live alternative systems, but these are usually known only by the people who live them or are affiliated to them. In addition, the small scale makes it hard to believe how such an alternative might work in the world we live in. I also do see some value in small adjustments, that, over longer periods of time, will result in substantial changes. Small adjustments create security and prevent major missteps, but still, this resembles going on a hike without a map. Yes, you will move forward slow and steady but after a while you will start to wonder where it is that you are going. And every new step comes with more questions, more doubt, and then frustration. So, there is no doubt that we are in desperate need of a vision, an alternative political system. Without it we wander without purpose or, even worse, we retrace the steps we walked in the past.