Saturday, January 23, 2021

US Democracy Hypocrisy

 

Most pundits noted the resilience of our democracy in the days following the lethal violence within our nation’s capital.  They, like almost everyone, believe that democracy is our nation’s bedrock principle.  Without question we believed our democratic republic was the global gold standard for any stable government. 

That shine should now be gone.   And our national hypocrisy exposed.   An instigated mob of Trump supporters and enablers used their view of ‘democracy’ to bring this fool to power and then sustain his abuse of that power for four increasingly dangerous years.  It would be laughable (and is from the capitols of other nations) if his persistently proven lies, immoral exploits, and abuses of power were not so dangerously foreboding.  

There should be no doubt that it is important for people to have a say in the laws of any government they will be forced to obey.  It would be wise to grasp the fact that what they have to say needs to match with reality.  Not just their own, but those of science and the basic foundation of every major religion – the golden rule.  But what is far more important is for everyone to know that history has repeatedly proven that democracies have never worked.  Like houses built with flawed materials democracies always collapse under stress.

There are a few undeniable truths that have fueled dozens of succinct quotes by respected political analysis, philosophers, and even our nation’s founding architects.  My favorite being Thomas Jefferson’s “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for lunch.  And a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.” 

Another is the persistent economic, social, and political stresses that remain rampant in our federal democratic republic 232 years later.   Most of these stresses can be pegged to the word ‘injustice’ - and an unequal enforcement of an incomplete list of fundamental human rights.  Rights that are essential to protecting the life, liberty, and pursuit happiness (however you want to define that sloppy word) for all.  (I find it profound that the author of our Declaration of Independence didn’t listen to his esteemed friend and eventual signer of that Declaration, Dr. Benjamin Rush, when he suggested replacing the word “Happiness” with “Health”.   Image where we would be today…if he had.)

Our nation has routinely praised similar violent displays in other nation’s capitols as valid outpourings of anger against other ‘undemocratic’ regimes.  Nearly 70 million Trump supporters believed the last election was undemocratic.  Too few Biden supporters failed to learn (or want to remember or believe) that our November election was a bit cloudy.  Numerous states understandably changed voting rules for ‘this’ election so it should be understandable for Trump’s supporters to feel cheated.  But the validity of Biden’s eventual clear victory, should have been accepted.   And minor flaws in that, or any election, should never excuse and exacerbate the cognitive dissonance (a mental flaw we all share) that drove Trump, and a majority of his followers and enablers, to clung to challenging the outcome of an election - until after it resulted deadly violence in our capitol.

Remember when protesters in Hong Kong violently broke into the city’s legislative building in 2019?  US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called it “a beautiful sight,” and Mike Pompeo, our nation’s Secretary of State said that the US stood with them and supported their “freedom of expression”.

Before the deadly violence in our capital it would be difficult to find many US political makers justifying the muzzling of both protesters and the President.  The 1st Amendment is a bedrock of human rights in any valid democracy.  But popular pressure inspired major social media platforms to purge both Trump and his extreme supporters from their sites.  Even before January 6 Trump himself claimed those platforms were working against him.  After the attempted insurrection Jafar Blori wrote in Kayhan, an extremely conservative Iran newspaper, “Yes, you heard right, the biggest pretender to democracy and freedom of expression in the world,” the one that censures others for attacking the free press, “overnight became the biggest censor in the world!”

How many Americans remember that the US was largely responsible for the overthrow of Iranian’s legitimately elected progressive President?  Or, the many other popular democratic elections around the world our nation has undermined?

Then there is our nation’s 2nd Amendment -- based on the fundamental principle of self-defense and our only real protection of ‘we the people’ against a tyrannical government.   I dare to believe this amendment still holds.   And that nearly every elected official at every level of government who opposes allowing firearms into their house of decision making (and passes laws to enforce it) is a hypocrite.

 Going way out on a limb I suggest that if guns were allowed without restriction into these institutions (and even corporate board rooms) we would live in a far more just society where those not abiding by the golden rule would have inspiration to reconsider.

If our elections continue to fail in ensuring such a culture of fairness and respect at local, state, national, and global levels -- there are no laws capable of preserving the stability and security that we all desire for ourselves and our children.   Something is clearly needed to demonstrate the need for our responsibly exercising our freedoms - in this increasingly interconnected world.   

That said, real security is essentially an illusion.   Without expanding our responsibility to live our lives in ways that enables the lives of others to thrive, our freedoms and our security will not be sustained.

There is a viable alternative to democracy as the most important guiding principle in our American brand.  It is phrase frequently used but rarely defined or understood.  Note how often you have heard the phrase “the rule of law”. 

Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy once offered the most useful definition of this phrase when asked by an international audience “what makes the rule of law most effective?”  He said it requires “three basic elements”.  First is democracy.  People want a say in the laws they will live under. But that is not enough. Hitler had that. Second is justice.  The laws need to be applied equally upon everyone. But that still has problems if basic rights are ignored.  The third, is that the laws must be protective of certain inalienable rights.  Rights that everyone has because they are born.  Rights they have regardless of their skin color, age, sex, religion, ethnicity, or nation of birth.

To survive, we grasp the fundamental reality that we must unite in making a basic decision on how we organize and manage our interactions with each other (known as politics). In addition, we only have a simple spectrum of options we can chose from.   At one end of the spectrum is completely unlimited individual freedom. No enforceable rules or laws.  At the other end?  All out war.  With no means of effectively limiting the means of mass murder or mayhem without abolishing nearly every human freedom.

If our minds can grasp these fundamental facts, then we can see we need to engineer a political system we can live in that maximizes both our freedom and our security.   

Tragically, the concept of democracy is closer to the war end of the spectrum.  The “Rule of Law” is in the smack in the middle. 

If you haven’t noticed, the world is increasingly chaotic, dangerous, and politically unstable.  This is due to several basic factors.

1.       The evolution of multi-use technologies and their global spread, affordable access, and anonymous use as a weapons of mass destruction, death, delusion, or distraction.

2.       A persistent global system of governance that is unjust, undemocratic, and unenforceable, while increasingly influenced by populist movements that divide people instead of united them.

3.       Increasing global threats that can require unified global solutions effectively addressing root causes.

4.       The evolution of pathogens regardless (and sometimes exacerbated by) our reactions to them and the unsustainable degradation of our planet’s/species’ life support systems.

5.       The resistance of democratic nations (and our minds) to adjust to these accelerating changes and threats.

In a nutshell “Things change.  Can we?”

 

No comments:

Post a Comment