In severa, discussions of the production and impacts of scientific knowledge, we almost always mention democracy. We claim that we need to make the development of scientific knowledge more democratic, we claim that a democratic system works for the spread of ideas. Why do we claim this? Is there any reason for saying that knowledge ought to be democratically created? Why do we gravitate towards democracy? This is, in my opinion, the more important question. Science and Technology Studies promotes understanding the methods of science, and I believe that also includes understanding democracy.
Democracy is not a new concept; the Greeks advocated democracy as early as the sixth century BCE. The rest of the world, for the better part of history, remained tribal and feudal. That is, of course, until shots rang out in 1776, beginning the American Revolution. Democracy was sparked, and the governmental style took hold in Western culture and remains the prominent ideology, at least in partiality, to this day. This is only a brief and by no means extensive history of democracy, but it does establish the importance of democracy.
Democracy was used as a form of liberation, to bring power back to the people, to forsake the days of monarchs and oligarchs for a world of freedom and independence, in America and in much of European society. That was nearly 250 years in the past, and when we look to our present world, what is the importance of democracy? We believe in democracy, to a large extent, because it is what we are ffamiliar with. Anyone born in the United States has been raised in the arms of democracy, has been taught, often from a very early age (the methods of teaching and the role of media in our present society are another important topic, when looking at the proliferation of knowledge, societal values, stereotypes, political opinions, etc), that any government ought to be democratic, otherwise it is dubbed as evil and cruel. We see this at the beginning of the Cold War, the famed “global war on communism.” Communism was feared because it opposed the ideals of democracy and capitalism. We are inherently afraid of anything that contradicts our preexisting perceptions, it is an unfortunate and dangerous human habit. Any novel on a dystopian society never features a democratic government, as democracy is intended to be portrayed as a means of human prosperity and salvation, and so I believe that we all, as a result of society, are not free to think in this sense.
We have all been conditioned, in some way, to think in line with the virtual hive mind of society. We are expected to think that democracy is “righteous” or “just,” mainly because someone or some group told us that it was right. Too few people stop to ask and understand why they believe what they believe. This mentality can be taken in other areas besides politics, religion for instance is an excellent example. My goal is not to promote any singular government, but to question the fundamental values of our society, which I believe too many take for granted. Democracy is not inherently good, nor is it inherently evil, no idea is fully one or the other; democracy has the capacity to work, but there are many instances where it does not work. When the United States put its hand in Cuba, or annexed Puerto Rico or Hawaii, where was democ4racy? Who remembers when democracy elected Salvador Allende or Adolf Hitler, two men who, almost all will agree, both committed numerous and uncountable violations of our established human rights (then again it is important to remember all of the human rights violations the United States has committed in its brief history)?
There are several other governments that have been extremely successful over the course of human history that were not democratic, but they are criticized because they were not something we approve of. I believe that just because something is accepted and has worked in the past that it will necessarily function in the future. Holding too firmly to any one idea or practice will eventually corrupt and destroy that idea, however you wish to define the term. We need to stop assuming that we are right. We need to stop fearing the unknown and the different. In making any practice universal, we are hindering human progress. Some progress will be made, but it will be only the progress that benefits the method. Take a step back, look at the world through a lens other than the one that has been so heavily engraved on your own eyes. Listen to the someone who opposes your own view, respect ideas that are different from your own. It is okay to disagree or even hate ideas like democracy or communism or religion, but you cannot hate people beause of those ideas. You may fear communism, but you cannot dehumanize a communist. What works for you may not work for someone else. Our perception of evil may be someone else’s perception of good.