The philosophy of history that I was taught growing up could be best described as American Constitutional Hubris. That’s been the focus of history classrooms since World War 2. I was taught that there have been good ideas in history and bad ideas. Our ideas are the good ones, and that’s why we won.
It’s never been that simple. There are strengths and weaknesses in Democracy, Republicanism, Capitalism, Socialism, Fascism, Communism, and all the rest. Each is vulnerable to evil in different ways. Most of the movements we think of as Fascist or Communist or Socialist or Democratic were themselves conglomerations of different ideas, none of them as purely good or evil as we like to think.
The evil aspects of these ideas can evolve. They latch on to more noble ideas and twist them. Our own Constitutional Democracy is not as immune to this type of corruption as we like to think. Our naivety on that point is dangerous.
Evil ideas assaulted our democracy head-on during World War II and the Cold War. They were parasites on globalism and progress, and they were defeated.
The parasites evolved. They crept into our political system, hid behind noble ideals, and wrapped themselves in the American flag.
If colonialism cannot beat democracy head-on, it goes asymmetric. Instead of pushing its adversaries into reservations or ghettos, it redraws the lines on the map so their political voice disappears.
If tyranny cannot beat democracy head-on, it goes asymmetric. It convinces people that democracy is not hurt when fewer people vote, it’s actually helped, because the people who really deserve to vote will determine the outcome.
If fascism cannot beat democracy head-on, it goes asymmetric. It reduces politics to a cutthroat competition where winning dirty is morally superior to compromise.
If anarchy cannot beat democracy head-on, it goes asymmetric. It disrupts and undermines the institutions that make the rule of law meaningful.
Both political parties have glorious core ideas and and both have contributed to the freedom and comfort we know today.
Both political parties also have their problems. But undemocratic methods are not equally distributed between the parties. The parties are not mirror images of each other.
There are rotten apples in the basket. Those rotten apples are the undemocratic ideas and methods that are used and supported in the party. Their rot will continue to spread until those apples are thrown out.
Donald Trump is a symptom, not a cause. He did not create the undemocratic practices of his political party. He personified them. Donald Trump is not the rotten apple. He is the stench.
I pray for the man. I pray for his party. It's a great political party with a history of important ideas. I also pray that he and his party fail until these undemocratic ideas are purged from the party.
I’m not particularly optimistic. Donald Trump had to work very hard to lose his advantage. A better politician than Donald Trump could be more undemocratic and also more popular. We'll face that challenge someday. Maybe someday soon.
Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.
Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility, value others above yourselves, not looking to your own interests, but each of you to the interests of others. -- Philippians 2:3-4
<end>
<Notes>
This is the last of a six-part series which began with the post "Bending toward justice".
Recommended book: How Democracies Die, by Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt
Recommended book: The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil, by Philip G. Zimbardo
Recommended book: The Reason Why: The Story of the Fatal Charge of the Light Brigade, by Cecil Woodham-Smith
Article: Why Trump Supporters Believe He Is Not Corrupt
Article: Elections Don't Matter, Institutions Do
Recommended book: Black Earth: The Holocaust as History and Warning, by Timothy Snyder {This book shows how the destruction of institutions helped cause the Holocaust.}
"Believe it or not, I’m not by nature a particularly political person. I love figuring out how the world works, and also enjoy finding ways to explain things in plain English. I don’t enjoy partisan fights, although I obviously don’t shy away from taking sides."
That is a Paul Krugman quote, but I'm quoting it because it mirrors my feelings--I come to partisan conclusions in this series, but believe the analysis is not particularly partisan.
Comments