Survival vs. Democracy: The Struggles of the 80%
December 13, 2024
For the 80% of the population surviving on 3,000 guilders or less per month, expecting active participation in democracy is unrealistic. When survival takes precedence, there is little energy or bandwidth left for civic engagement, voting, dissent, or any meaningful contribution to democratic processes. This predicament has deep roots, and its consequences are becoming ever more evident.
One major factor is the enduring legacy of the Friends and Family governance model. For years, key positions that the most capable individuals should have filled have instead been occupied by those chosen for their connections rather than their competence. This nepotism perpetuates systemic inefficiency and exacerbates existing problems. As the cycle continues, the issues grow larger, suggesting theories such as those in Why Nations Fail. The situation forces us to ask a sobering question: are we veering dangerously close to becoming a failed state?
On the other side of the spectrum lies the 20% who enjoy better financial stability and education. Many within this group lack any real understanding of what poverty entails. Instead of engaging with the stark realities presented by the statistics, they dismiss them outright. They question studies conducted by the Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS), pointing to the informal sector as proof that the numbers don’t reflect reality. They argue that research on sensitive topics, such as sexual behavior or income, is notoriously unreliable worldwide.
This dismissal serves a psychological purpose: it eases their cognitive dissonance. By doubting the validity of these reports, they absolve themselves of the need to empathize or take responsibility. They continue their lives, untouched by the struggles of the majority, believing that the problem lies elsewhere—not with them.
The danger of such a divide is that it fosters ignorance and erodes empathy. I am reminded of an unsettling incident in the United States where the CEO of a health insurance company was murdered in cold blood by a disgruntled customer. The customer’s frustration stemmed from delayed and rejected claims—delays that likely felt like life-or-death decisions. When the gap between those in power and those struggling becomes too wide, and when one bubble has no understanding or empathy for another, explosions like these are inevitable.
This is the risk we face when a privileged minority remains oblivious to the realities of the majority. When survival is someone else’s problem, and the privileged can’t see beyond their own bubble, societal tensions simmer just below the surface. And when those tensions erupt, the consequences are both individual and systemic. This is why addressing the growing disconnect in our society is not just a moral imperative but a necessity for our collective survival.
Miguel Goede
Σχόλια