The U.S. democracy is threatened like never before, says a new book. Four Threats - The Recurring Crisis of American Democracy, by professors Suzanne Mettler and Robert Lieberman, identifies four threats that historically have created crisis in U.S. democracy — political polarization, democratic exclusion, economic inequality, and executive power. All four are simultaneously producing a crisis in U.S. democracy this year.
Mettler when asked on the role the Republican party plays in the present crisis said, that when they started writing the book, they did not think the Republican Party was the problem.
But they now realize that could be the case.
"if you look at political polarization, there are ways in which both parties have led to its escalation. But Republican leaders have taken much more initiative to try to drive their party in a way that has been polarizing.
We also put a little bit more of the blame on Republicans when it comes to what we call the conflict over who belongs — who is a member of society, what their status is. This is a kind of conflict that’s happened again and again in U.S. history, very often involving the status of blacks.
But at certain moments, like the 1850s, it becomes organized along the lines of the party system where one party is saying our way of life is under threat and the other party is saying we want greater equality in this country — we want to expand the promises of the Declaration of Independence that all are created equal. In that sense, it is both a threat to democracy and there’s also the possibility that democracy becomes stronger and more robust.
Then there’s rising economic inequality. Here again, it has been particularly the Republican Party that has been working for tax cuts to the affluent, deregulation etc. There are some ways in which the modern Democratic Party have help businesses and the affluent, but the Republican Party has done more.
Executive aggrandizement, the fourth threat, is the one that has really been engaged in pretty equally by both parties since FDR.
But when the Republican Party gets the White House now, they are using it to undermine efforts for greater racial equality and other kinds of equality. And they’re using their power to do the bidding of the affluent.
And so the parties do very different things with executive power." (This and the following paraphrased excerpts are from Vox, Ezra Klein, "RBG, minority rule, and our looming legitimacy crisis. Political scientist Suzanne Mettler on why the threat to U.S. democracy is perhaps greater now than ever before." Sept. 25, 2020)
Mettler and Lieberman suggest people should think of democracy as a continuum rather than an on-off switch. "At any given time, a country can be more or less democratic, depending on how close it comes to meeting a basic set of standards — "holding free and fair elections, upholding the rule of law, recognizing the idea of legitimate opposition" and protecting rights.
Meantime, according to the authors, U.S. is suffering from
four conditions that pose threats to the sustainability and survival of democracy:
political polarization;
conflict over who belongs as a member of the political community (particularly along lines of race, ethnicity and national origin);
high and growing economic inequality; and
excessive executive power.
Polarization has been on the rise since the 1980s, dividing people into hostile “us vs. them” camps.
Conflict over inclusion and status, particularly regarding race and immigration, increasingly divides the parties.
Economic inequality has been escalating since the 1970s, prompting the affluent to mobilize politically to protect their wealth from those who seek greater redistribution.
For nearly a century, presidents of both parties have claimed greater power for the office and left it behind for their successors, increasing the opportunity and temptation to use power for personal or partisan aims.
Expansion of executive power has been happening throughout the 20th Century. Franklin Roosevelt assumed the presidency at a moment of deep political and economic crisis, and many expected him to assume dictatorial power emulating leaders across the Atlantic. Although he did not take that approach, Roosevelt left the presidency much stronger than he found it. In different hands, this power could serve a president’s personal or political aims. The presidential powers paved the way for Nixon’s abuses of power.
----------------------------------------------------
The four types of threats have posed a danger to U.S. democracy in the past:
In the 1790s, polarization between Federalists and Republicans threatened to tear the new republic apart, and
Three of the threats — polarization, conflict over membership and economic inequality — combined in the 1850s, and the country suffered a devastating civil war.
In the 1890s, these same three threats precipitated the disenfranchisement of millions of U.S. blacks.
in the 20th century, the growth of presidential power posed a danger
List of U.S. crises:
In the 1790s, political polarization emerged quickly and led to escalating conflict as epitomized by the Whiskey Rebellion, Alien and Sedition Acts, and fear of violence surrounding the deadlocked election of 1800.
In the 1850s, divisions over slavery and questions of who belongs in the political community tore the country apart, leading to the Civil War in the next decade.
In the 1890s, economic inequality combined with polarization and conflict over who belongs in the democracy led to the disenfranchisement of millions of black men, followed by the establishment of formal segregation.
In the 1930s, during the Great Depression, executive power expanded.
In the 1970s, President Richard Nixon’s abuse of executive power led to his resignation and a crisis of confidence in the presidency.
For the first time in history, the U.S. faces all four threats at once and they are combining and interacting in dangerous ways. The deep political polarization, race- and gender-based tensions, soaring economic inequality and strong executive powers have given rise to political leaders willing to circumvent established norms to gain, wield and keep power.
The threats have grown deeply entrenched, and they will likely persist and wreak havoc for some time to come, said Mettler.
Although the threats have been gathering steam for decades and have been on full view during the Trump presidency, the events of 2020 have made them much clearer. The pandemic and the economic crisis it precipitated have dramatically exposed partisan, economic and racial fault lines. U.S. residents of color have disproportionately been victims of the virus. The pandemic-induced recession has exacerbated economic inequality. The most economically vulnerable have suffered job losses, food and housing insecurity and the loss of affordable health care.
Political differences have shaped the response to the pandemic. Even the simple act of wearing a mask has become a partisan symbol. The Black Lives Matter protests that erupted after the police killing of George Floyd have further highlighted the deep hold that systemic racism has long had on U.S. politics and society.
Crises slowed end to Racism
One of the tragic historical patterns of U.S. history is that often, preserving democracy for some has entailed perpetuating and expanding racial hierarchy and exclusion, a fundamental compromise of democratic values.
In the 1790s and the 1930s, political leaders tacitly agreed to leave suppression of blacks in place.
In other eras, parties divided over race equality. When the party that favored a restoration of racist policies prevailed, as occurred in the South in the 1890s, the consequences for democracy were devastating. Although the parties are divided over race today, many people oppose the persistence of racism. This suggests that the balance of forces may be shifting in a more pro-democracy direction.
----------------------------------------------------------
Mettler and Lieberman suggest a way forward.
First, the U.S. must learn from history. Past crises identify factors that help democracy to thrive. The past shows us that democracy works well in a society that is less polarized, more inclusive and where people in power are held accountable.
Second, voters must vote for the candidates and parties who are judged to be best able to preserve and extend U.S. democracy. Democracy should be the top criterion, more important than ideology, economic prowess and party identity.
And third, we should remember that democracy is a work in progress and can change course. What has worked in the past may not necessarily work in the future.
-------------------
I agree and would add that reform of the electoral system could be a part of a new democracy. An electoral system that decreases political polarization; that encourages a variety of legislators of different colours - political as well as skin color; that allows representation of the poor, the old, the young, etc. is one that will help reduce economic inequality.
Such a system is Single Transferable Voting or another form of proportional representation.
A strong democratically-elected legislature would be a strong bulwark against growing undemocratic executive powers.
The basic set of values of a democracy - which Mettler listed as "holding free and fair elections, upholding the rule of law, recognizing the idea of legitimate opposition and protecting rights" - are exactly the sort of improvements that STV and other forms of proportional representation create - as they have proven wherever they have been used.
Recent moves such as New York City and Maine adopting preferential voting show that U.S. is starting to drag itself away from the traditional way of voting that it has used since the 1700s and into a new vista of democracy such as governments already experience in Europe and Australia. This may be the only way for the U.S. to address the four-fold democratic crisis that it now finds itself in.
Thanks for reading.
==============================
Comments