The processes of decision making is very closely related to the ethical standpoint and practices of any society and are reflective of the values and principles of the people. Indigenous communities often take pride in their democratic decision making processes, which is based on consultation, dialogue and persuasion. This approach reflects their deep respect for individual autonomy and sovereignty as well as the need for general agreement.
The process of consensual decision making process indicates the collective will of the people and the egalitarian world view that power and authority does not reside with a chosen few, but with everyone. It indicates the absence of a central or coercive authority - hence a decentralized power system - where the decision making is collective and one that is based on conscience and ‘authority of good.’ It implies that the community leaders are accountable and responsive to the needs of the people and are transparent in their system of functioning.
Through this process they collectively add their voices to the narrative that is history, translate their understanding of history and justice and bring the power of their wisdom to bear on the relationships they have with others. The consensual process indicates that it is a voluntary process where people are not coerced to comply with authority.
However with the political subjugation of indigenous communities, not only has the approach of consensus decision making been negated, it has been influenced and misused by the state system. The ethics of procedural electoral politics in essence contradicts the ethics of consensual models. As a result electoral politics have to a large extent created a new set of values that has damaged the ethos of decision making in indigenous communities.
Electoral politics and a centralized bureaucracy - hence centralized power - have been imposed in place of consensual models of decision making. Electoral politics has resulted in manipulation of power of every kind, the disengagement of debate and dialogue over issues that matter to the community. Further the control of power to a few people to make policies increases the possibilities of the abuse of power and the fundamental lack of transparency, accountability and participation.
The impact of electoral politics on indigenous communities has been phenomenal. It has promoted the society to new standards of corruption and deception. By ensuring that the electoral politics be based on ‘tribal’ lines, divisions are created along lines of primordial identity. This has only created suspicion that seeks to damage our social and moral fiber. The electoral politics has ensured in legitimizing an unjust power structure with a few powerful elite and a silent majority. This has led to the continued pursuit of power by the elite and the struggle for rights by the people. It is therefore critical to analyze ‘political violence’ within this perspective.
Taiaiake states that one of the reasons why the state has been able to impose its anti-historical view is due to cultural ignorance and arrogance. He goes on to say that the state derives its strength from a false claim to morality, justice and authority. The inability to debunk the myth of the morality of the state has ensured the furthered dependency of the people on the system which has resulted in passivity and inaction. In fact people only ‘react to injustice and oppression’ when their ‘immediate survival’ is being threatened.
Ironically democracy has been reduced to a state where a bag of rice, petty personal favors or a sum of money determines which the vote. It contradicts the very ethical framework of democratic values, accountability, transparency, equality, dignity, self-determination and fairness. For the sake of democracy it is essential that the people themselves engage in a process of self-criticism to ensure that the overwhelming conditions of reality does not usurp the values of freedom and democracy. It is vital that the people take ownership of decision making processes based on well founded ethical norms.
