Thank you so much for your ongoing feedback. I read and replied to most of your e-mails personally and in this blog entry I’d like to respond to the issue in your e-mails that provoked me the most.

Several of you made the point that, if a political party lays out its plans for the country’s education system in its manifesto and then this party is elected by a majority of the population, then that party has every right to make any changes to the education system that were outlined in its manifesto. The fact that I personally don’t like those changes does not mean that the party is playing ping-pong with the schooling of the nation’s children and I simply need to accept the results of the democratic process.

At this juncture I feel compelled to point out that  the UK government does not really consist of a genuine democracy, but rather a hostile, point-scoring oscillation between just two parties, set in stone by the construction of the debating chamber with its two opposing benches. Compare this with the circular construction of the German Reichstag or the European parliament!

Secondly, the UK  is not a genuine democracy because it has a large group of completely unelected representatives, known as the House of Lords, consisting of church bishops and peers who were simply born into their privileged position and not elected. If anyone thinks that this unelected body has no power, just look at the way that it has twice defeated the government in the last two weeks on the issue of implementing a referendum that was voted for by a majority of UK voters. Democracy? Get real.

Thirdly, there is the issue of proportional representation. We have read in the news this week how the complete absence of any degree of proportional representation leaves vast swathes of the voting public feeling disenfranchised and alienated. The result of this could well entail the dissolution of the United Kingdom as Scotland pulls away from the UK and strengthens its links with Europe. Of course I realise that no system of democracy can fulfil every requirement, but this is no excuse for not having the kind of hybrid model that many other countries have around the world. Neither is the age-old, British argument that any kind of proportional representation would lead to a coalition and therefore a weak government. An argument that is even used to justify moving the electoral boundaries shortly before an election in order to ensure a majority in key constituencies for the party that is in power.

True democracy, irrespective of the precise details of its format, is very costly. It requires lengthy dialogue, exhaustive dialectic, a humble willingness to compromise, cultural understanding, a sensitivity to linguistic subtleties, and much more besides. And there are no shortcuts. Democracy has sadly become a value that we increasingly have to fight for against a backdrop of racism, isolationism and terrorism. The Dutch, today, can be very proud of themselves.

So, write that book, post that blog, take to the streets, however you want to do it, but let’s agree to fight together to keep true democracy alive. And let’s also never forget, there can be no democracy without the freedom of speech.

“A free press is the unsleeping guardian of every other right that free men prize.”  Winston Churchill.