Matthew Comments

Our democracy is not only reliant on the words of the Constitution. It is reliant on countless rules and norms that have persisted through generations. When people in governance decide they must win at all costs, those rules and norms become loopholes for political advantage. It does not violate the letter of the laws of democracy, but it is undemocratic. Abusing the rules of governance  is an undemocratic method to achieve political victory. It is the theft of political power from people. When the people of a state elect a governor, they expect him or her to have the powers of the governor. In at least a couple examples, state legislatures have rushed to strip power from the office of the governor after elections because their party did not win. In Wisconsin, the leader of the legislature said this was necessary because the incoming governor “could not be trusted”, despite the obvious fact that the incoming governor had been elected by a majority of voters in the state. This is an...

America has changed over time. There were some strange forces that held us together, and kept power from being concentrated. Those forces have faded. Resources can be concentrated more easily, and the political parties have less in common. (For that story, read the prior three posts.) As should be expected, each party has made strategic choices in response to those changes, and each choice influences the choices that come later. Both parties have contributed to American greatness. Both parties have great ideas to offer. Both parties have some bad actors. Both parties “play the game”. But one party made a choice that sent it down a more undemocratic path.  It's not because people are bad or crazy. But each choice leads to the choices that come later. Let’s look at five [5] examples of undemocratic practices. Before I begin, let me be clear. I'm not  confusing democracy with our democratic republic. I understand we’re not an absolute democracy. When I say “undemocratic”, I mean ...

In America’s first 100 years, political life was strange. Slavery was the ultimate wedge issue. It united the South. Although Southern politicians may have diverged from each other on any number of issues, they circled the wagons when it came to slavery. They were in a constant war with black equality. Think about what war does to political life. Think of the national mood after 9/11. When people feel there is a threat to their "way of life", other aspects of political life become more flexible. We may have a little disagreement about taxes, but those people are attacking our way of life! This war-like footing in relation to slavery was a political strangeness. This political strangeness persisted until the Civil War. After the Civil War, of course… it became even more important. Prior to the Civil War, the subjugation of blacks was explicit federal government policy. It did not require nuance or obfuscation. After the Civil War, black oppression required even more cross-par...