Part Two Political Models as Exemplars: Lessons from History and Beyond
This is the second of a four-part series that looks at party politics, arguing that it is time for change. Part One considered that party politics is actually undermining governance effectiveness. This part looks at political models as exemplars, learning from frequent lessons in history and asks if the African village model and others are worth examining
DOUGLAS RASBASH
As we contemplate the idea of removing party from politics, it is essential to look at alternative models that have governed societies successfully without the divisive nature of party politics.
History offers numerous examples, and one of the most instructive is the African Village Model – a system that prioritises consensus over conflict and community over competition.
But this isn’t the only model worth examining. Other cultures and historical periods also offer valuable lessons that can inform a new approach to governance.
The African Village Model: Governance Through Consensus
The African Village Model, which is still practiced in various forms across the continent, is rooted in the principle of consensus. Decisions are made through extended discussions involving all members of the community, or their representatives, until a consensus is reached.
There is no concept of a ‘ruling party’ versus an ‘opposition.’ Instead, the focus is on what is best for the community as a whole. Leaders are chosen based on wisdom, experience, and their ability to unify, not on their ability to dominate or defeat an opposing faction.
This model reflects a profound understanding that governance should be about building and maintaining harmony within the community. The African Village model teaches us that leadership does not have to be about control; it can be about stewardship, guiding a group towards common goals with respect for diverse opinions.
The Athenian Democracy: Direct Participation
Another model worth exploring is the Athenian democracy of ancient Greece. Though not without its flaws, it was a system that emphasized direct participation by citizens in decision-making. While Athenian democracy was exclusive, involving only free male citizens, its principle of engaging citizens directly in governance is compelling.
Without political parties, Athenian citizens debated and voted on laws and policies themselves, rather than through representatives who might be swayed by party loyalties.
Modern technology could facilitate a more inclusive version of this model, enabling widespread participation without the need for political parties to act as intermediaries.
This could lead to a more engaged and informed electorate where decisions are made based on public deliberation rather than political manoeuvring.
The Iroquois Confederacy: A Balance of Powers
The Iroquois Confederacy, a union of Native American tribes, offers another instructive model. The Confederacy operated under the Great Law of Peace, which emphasized the balance of power and collective decision-making.
Leaders, known as chiefs, were selected by clan mothers based on their ability to prioritise the welfare of the people. Decisions were made collectively, with input from all clans, and policies were designed to benefit the confederacy as a whole.
This model shows that a system can maintain checks and balances without relying on adversarial politics.
The Iroquois Confederacy was able to achieve stability and cooperation through a focus on shared responsibility and the common good.
Lessons from Monarchies and Non-Partisan Democracies
Even certain historical monarchies and modern non-partisan democracies offer lessons. While monarchies are often seen as the antithesis of democracy, some – like the early constitutional monarchy of England – emphasised the role of a neutral arbiter who could rise above factionalism.
In modern times, countries like Kuwait and Oman have implemented non-partisan democratic systems where political parties are either absent or play a limited role, and governance is conducted through appointed representatives or councils.
These systems suggest that it is possible to have a functioning government without the perpetual cycle of elections, campaigns, and party-driven policymaking. Instead, they focus on stability, continuity, and long-term planning – qualities often lacking in partisan systems.
Moving Forward: Rethinking Governance for the 21st Century
As we reflect on these models, it becomes clear that adversarial politics is not the only path to effective governance.
The African Village model, the Athenian democracy, the Iroquois Confederacy, and even certain aspects of monarchies and non-partisan democracies all offer alternatives that emphasise unity, consensus, and the common good.
These systems remind us that the purpose of governance is not to win power but to serve people.
By studying these models, we can begin to imagine a new form of governance for the 21st century – one that is less about party loyalty and more about collective responsibility.
The world is changing rapidly, issues are far more global than national, the interconnectedness of regions more important than ever and the influence of artificial intelligence becomes ever more obvious – it is clear that political systems must evolve.
The lessons of history, when combined with the possibilities of modern technology and a renewed commitment to the public good, could pave the way for a new era of politics – one that finally leaves the divisiveness of adversarial politics behind.