The triumph of modern capitalism is to persuade people who are excluded from decision-making that they are the decision makers, to persuade those who are victimised by the system that they are its winners, to persuade outsiders they are insiders.
And it has worked magnificently here.
The Tasc "Democracy Audit" published on Monday, shows 70 per cent of Irish people are satisfied with democracy. Nearly two in five people thinks a feature of democracy is an equal society and only one in 20 think a free market is an important feature. Yet most of them think democracy is fine here. Almost everybody (90 per cent) think a right to education, to housing and to healthcare regardless of income should be enshrined in law.
Nearly two out of three think when "ordinary" citizens make an effort they can influence policy and "really make a difference". Only one in five thinks being active in politics is a waste of time.
And yet we have a system where not alone do citizens have little or no influence on politics, neither does the average TD. This is true of Government as well as opposition TDs. Did you notice (again) Michael McDowell's conceit in the last few weeks over the cafe-bars proposal? Infuriated by backbench Fianna Fáil TDs who had the effrontery to stymie the cafe-bars proposal, "he" is going to deregulate the sale of alcohol generally.
McDowell - more than most Ministers - has the view that everything done by his department is done by him, but this claim to legislate unilaterally was surprising even for him. And yet that is what Ministers think they can do. They decide on a course of action and there is an expectation that Government TDs will back it, come what may.
There is a reason for this and it is that Government TDs are invariably quiescent, except when some major issue comes along affecting the liquor licensing trade. Legislation is decided and drafted not by the legislature but by the executive arm of Government. It is the executive arm of Government that works to hold the legislature accountable, not the other way around.
And the people think they are governing the country; that democracy is fine. That it's okay to be involved once every four or five years to vote on a whole jumble of policies by voting for candidates in a multi-seat constituency and then to be ignored for the rest of the time.
As for economic and social "rights" being enshrined in the Constitution or in law, that is one thing the main parties are agreed upon. It will not happen. And yet the vast majority of the people say they want that? Some democracy.
Yes, when a head of steam builds up on an issue the politicians run scared, back down or away or out, whatever. But that is seldom enough. For the most part the people don't matter. The trick is to convince them they do matter, they are the ones calling the shots, they have the real power, when in fact they have the mere mirage of power, they call very few shots, they don't matter except at election time.
The process is called hegemony, the cultural supremacy of a "common sense" , which is not common sense at all. The acceptance by the masses that a system that is grossly unfair is both fair and inevitable - there is no other system that works.
Take, for instance, taxes. Any suggestion that taxes might have to be increased to pay for improved public services is almost anathema, greeted by the mantra that high taxes in the past caused massive unemployment, despondency, national collapse and despair. The question: how is it then that when higher levels of taxation prevailed when this present Government came into office in 1997, that the economy was booming at a higher rate than ever previously or since?
Another question: we were told for years we could not distribute the wealth before we created it; now that we have created it, why can't we distribute it? A political system that is mired in favouritism, and that depends on private wealth to fund it, cannot be fair, and yet to challenge the "right" of rich people to buy the political process is to interfere with democratic rights! Fantastic! A "democracy" where even elected representatives have little power, where the people are consulted only occasionally, where hugely important decisions are taken by an institution that responds to no democratic accountability at all ( the judiciary), where we surrender more and more decisions to an international institution that at its core is undemocratic (the European Union), and democracy is fine?
There is an acknowledgement that the media is hugely influential in shaping political opinion. How then no concern at all that the media is dominated by powerful corporate interests with vested interests in persuading the populace the present system is fine, that, what corruption there is, is merely the indulgence of a few already demonised politicians, and where unfairness is merely at the margins, soon to be addressed?
The think-tank that commissioned this "Democratic Audit" report should engage in a further study on how in such an undemocratic society people think democracy is fine, and how in such an unequal society people think equality is being advanced.