If we stick to the text of the Gospel, Pilate, the Roman procurator of Judea, resorted to the trick of improvising a sui generis plebiscite in the ritual of washing his hands under the pressure of the Pharisees to decide the fate of the condemned.

He asked the people whom to condemn to torture and death, and whom to forgive. “The people”, summoned by the government and under the influence of a toxic mixture of passion, manipulation and morbidity, decided in a primary and perverse act of “plebiscite democracy” to convict the innocent and release Baraba. “Crucify him!” crowds still echoes as a testament to the stupidity of the “democracy of disorder”.

Tetramorph

This episode, apart from the religious connotations, is proof of the original sin of plebiscite democracies and the drama of shifting political responsibility to the decision of “the people”.

Beyond the situation, the question is whether the assembled masses can peacefully resolve what is being asked of them. Can one vote on life and death, peace or war, happiness or unhappiness. The question is whether the majority can legitimize the illegitimate failure of the legislator, whether the sum of individual votes can transform the nature of things?

Answers include criticizing the dogma of the majority. And they lead to the question of whether the structure of the government, and specifically the legislation, understood only as the core of party interests and not as part of the republican system, can wash its hands and incur unjustified irresponsibility. The question also raises the issue of the role of the leader,

the question of the limitations of political systems, the function of mass acts as an instrument for deciding the fate of nations. It is worth asking how many of them read the text of Montecristi’s constitution that was adopted in the referendum in 2008? Was such a way of adopting the constitution legitimate?

Prophets and priests

One of the fundamental themes and one of the lessons highlighted by the Gospel passage is the track record of the legislative function, and the political authorities in general, which causes the transfer of responsibility from decisions that are imposed on the people. Plebiscite procedures, when they are frequent, are a notorious proof of the bankruptcy of the political mandate, the expiration of the commission to enact laws on behalf of the community. What are the members of the assembly for if the population has to take on a task that they do not fulfill?

Although the referendum may now be inevitable, given the deep crisis that is engulfing us, the decision to call it is the result of the blocking of institutions, the ill-will and uselessness of the Assembly, the irresponsibility of the political class, the very structure of the ineffective state, and the bankruptcy of the system.

(This article takes ideas from Gustav Zagrebelski’s book, Crucifixion and Democracy). (OR)