Bottom-Up Organization

Bottom-Up Organization

By Rick Smith

"The citizen can bring our political and governmental institutions back to life, make them responsive and accountable, and keep them honest. No one else can."

-John Gardner, novelist

The current political system in Canada is democratic in the sense that the people choose our leaders. However, to believe that it follows the guiding maxim of “by the people, of the people, and for the people” necessitates a narrow interpretation of the proverb. To understand this, one must differentiate between what it means to have a “top-down” as opposed to a “bottom-up” political structure, the merits of the latter over the former in achieving true democracy, and the need to make the change in order to fulfill the program of reconstruction Canadian society for common benefit.

Government exists to guide the population in their pursuit of happiness, whatever that means to the particular society. Demonstrably, governments can be organized in a multitude of different ways, including monarchies, dictatorships or republics, with varying structures within these systems. Most systems in place in the world today function on a basis of “top-down” government, which is to say that they operate by working from the ruling class towards the greater population. Such examples are found more clearly within dictatorships, such as that of the Chinese Communist Party over the People’s Republic of China, than in democratic systems such as that of the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, or Western European nations. The “bottom-up” system contrasts with the “top-down”. By the most basic of explanations, “bottom-up” involves decisions being made at a grassroots level and projected towards the government. This could be done in numerous ways, involving direct democracy with more referendums such as was proposed by the Reform Party of Canada, or like in Switzerland where town councils involving all willing participants make decisions with great autonomy. It is suggested that the bottom-up system reflects the will of the people better and is therefore more democratic.

Top-down systems should be considered undesirable because of the empowerment of elites and the resulting thievery of power from the layperson. This is often not recognized as being a characteristic of democratic governments, largely on the basis that as the people vote, they have absolute control over the formation of governments. Nevertheless, there are examples that the people do not necessarily hold complete power in a system that supposedly is a government that reflects the will of the people. One such example in Canada is a Strategic Counsel poll that reported that a solid 57% of Canadians opposed a combat mission in Afghanistan despite the prime minister’s continual insistence of this role. Perplexingly, as the Conservative Party holds a position of minority government, one would imagine that they would tread lightly in upholding principles that do not agree with the Canadian people. Being in this position, Stephen Harper’s party could be overruled by a combination of the Liberal Party, New Democratic Party and Bloc Quebecois, yet divisions among these parties on exact strategy prevent a halt to the combat mission. So, if the House of Commons is not composed of parties that reflect the will of the 57% of Canadians who want the combat mission ended, it begs the question of whether or not the House of Commons is a democratic institution on the basis that it is evidently not composed “of the people”. Canada is not alone in this syndrome of government-population conflict: 78% of Polish respondents were opposed to the Afghan mission, 54% of Germans were opposed, and while 54% of Dutch respondents were supportive of the mission, 51% did not want to extend their deadline for withdrawal. This is just one such example of how governments organized centrally and devolved from there are not always held responsible to the people.

To achieve the results of a truly democratic Canada, and consequently to set an example for other countries to follow, the people of Canada must seek to reorganize their political structure. This would have to start with immediately seizing control of their respective communities by forming community associations and demanding that politicians at other government levels recognize their autonomy. Decisions are constantly being made that affect a community without the proper consultation, and should they be properly consulted, the financial elite that wield influence in the top-down structure use their resources to sway the decisions. This has happened both in Canada and the United States involving the construction of Wal-Marts where people were concerned about the environmental, cultural and economic impact of the big-box retailer and sought to block its construction. The company would then use their multitudes of money to wage campaigns to promote their company and set up dubious citizen’s groups that counter-campaigned for supposed “choice”. Community associations should be generally free of direct leadership and have all decisions made through majority-rule voting. In this way, a leader of sorts will not be influenced a certain way by the will of any other entity than the people themselves. Community associations should then give way to municipal governments that functions as a union of community associations. That is to say, should an expressway be planned for a certain area, the will of all communities affected by the expressway’s construction would be the deciding factor. Such would have been the case in the construction of the Red Hill Expressway in Hamilton, Ontario. Rather than the influence of developers at City Hall, the various community associations that could have been set up in the area surrounding the Red Hill Valley would have been consulted and made the decision, as it is they whom the construction affects. Municipal governments would naturally give way to either regional or provincial governments, and ultimately to a federal government, but in the end the fundamental decisions about way of life would lie with the community associations. Furthermore, this bottom-up democracy would allow for decisions to more accurately project the will of the Canadian people by eliminating elitist factors in government that influence decisions.

If our goal in Canada is to build a perfect society, and it always should be, we must start with reorganizing our democracy. The current system allows for financial elites and carnivorous political groups to collaborate to overrule the majority in their quest for power. It was Abraham Lincoln who once said “government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the Earth”, and it is to him as a freer of slaves, champion for peace and defender of the common man that we must not accept elitism in our government. It is up to the average person to now unite with his or her neighbours to form a democracy in the streets, and it is there that we can expect wonderful changes to be made.