The Crisis of Communication in Democracy

The current democracy, totally different from ancient one, is due to improvement in modern, contemporary and postmodern media. Even though it sounds like a truism, this statement must be repeated continuously, especially because a democratic political system must never forget whom it owes and who should it be grateful to. This simple statement mainly explains why non-democratic regimes seek to control media.If freedom is defining element of a democracy, its relationship with interpersonal communication at level of a society is very tight: freedom helps development of communication, communication cannot exist without freedom, but, at same time, political freedom cannot grow in human society without communication.The fact that, in a modern sense, assumes existence of a transmission belt which conveys political messages is another element which contributes to being most complex human system. The way in which political communication is done directly influences rules of democratic game, exacerbating or diminishing its inherent imperfections.We live in an era in which, as Umberto Eco very well notices, aphorisms replace syllogisms and this has major repercussions in understanding what we call democracy.Like every other regime, is a discourse about power, the power of people, towards people and for people.1 If Lincoln's words were true, Lass well's formula who, whom, what says would be very simple, nation would communicate with nation. The meaning of contemporary is far from message conveyed by its etymological definition. This is because of, at practical level, for centuries, democratic discourse is discourse of representatives, and this can only be obtained by persuading elector.Characterized by a conceptual ambiguity, communication can be analysed more efficient in its relationship with political world, by researching effective discourse practices, which end up being political practices. Democratic political life can be characterized as a continuous effort to communicate on behalf of politicians, who want to support their actions, speaking being main way in which political participation can be attained. Except that:Generally, simple ideas govern spirit of nation. A false idea but clearly expressed will always have a greater power than a true, but complex, idea. Therefore, political parties - which are a sort of small nations in middle of a big one - always rush to adopt as a symbol a name or a principle which usually is an imperfect representation of their aim and of means they use, but without which they could neither survive nor act.2This model linked to community's need for simplifying communication allowed development in recent decades of a true democratization of democracy phenomenon. Far from being something paradoxical, term defines something very simple: political discourse in has turned into a powerpoint presentation and we notice a simplification of concept, of problems and of their solutions. An option polarizing process takes place, in other words, there is a decrease in quality of political discourse.This fact is generally closely linked to transformations of democratic political phenomenon and we notice an interdependence relationship. The decreased quality of political discourse influences and is influenced by fact that democratic discourse refers to political power, to gaining and maintaining it, exactly opposite of what liberals wanted when they built their doctrine: to limit political power. This means that only outcome of democratic approach doesn't have individual at its core, as an owner of rights, as a citizen and as a rational being, but he is just a pawn in political power play, and this is enough for him. …