Proposer: Gwyddion Williams
Resolution on Foreign Autocrats
No British government has any right to tell foreign countries how they should govern themselves. Democracy is at root whatever system delivers what a majority of the population desire, and can reasonably wish for. Conditional on no part of the population being excluded on grounds of religion or perceived race.
Our open electoral competitions work as well as they do, because they were norms long before British society was even loosely democratic. Before the vote had even been extended to most white males: extensions were largely based on the balance of power as it then stood.
Electoral competition can destabilise societies with different traditions. We should not be automatically hostile to autocrats or one-party systems in foreign countries – though we definitely don’t want them for our own society.
Amendment
Mover: Gwyddion Williams
Add the following:
“We should recognise that systems of rival political parties rest on this having been the norm for Britain since 1688, after a run of civil wars with no definite winner (though Roman Catholics and especially those in Ireland were definite losers). Note that it was not democratic even for white males until the 1880s. Nor for its US offshoot till maybe the 1830s.”
Amendment
Mover Peter Higgins
Replace second sentence with
“The WPB supports democracy as the expression of informed popular sentiment in principle but recognises that democracy is often corrupted by foreign intervention and interests, the excessive power and influence of capital and lack of political education and access to full and fair information as well as by rigged electoral systems where representation is disconnected from actual public opinion as in the UK. On these grounds, we do not believe it is for the WPB to judge the conditions of foreign peoples in their struggle for liberation from those corrupting influences and factors.”
Delete “on grounds of religion or perceived race” (opposition to exclusion should be absolute).
Delete final paragraph because it is covered by the first Amendment and replace it with ‘Notwithstanding our cautious position on democratic development overseas, the WPB is committed to the defence and expansion of democracy within the United Kingdom and to the reforms necessary at home to deal with all the corrupting influences outlined above.”.
I personally agree with the first sentence.
The rest is an history recap.
I agree with the gist of this motion, however this principle is already contained within our Party’s principle on anti imperialism. I’d suggest that if motion 3 passes this one be remitted as the content is already agreed through the phrase in motion 3 “we oppose any use of military action, support or imperial subversion or intervention outside these islands except in direct and immediate defence of the people.”
My motion is stronger than just general anti-imperialism. It asserts that we have no business saying that foreign governments are mistaken in not trusting a system that works for us based on different historic traditions.