Harry Targ :
On democracy: ‘Can we talk?’ A Repost
On democracy: ‘Can we talk?’ A Repost
The discussion of Russian interference in U.S.
elections should raise questions about other, perhaps internal, forms of
interference in a fully matured democratic process. This essay, written before
the 2016 elections, reflects on the various impediments that are characteristic
features of the electoral process in the United States. Given the realities of
concentrated money, power, media access, and the instrumentalities of the
government, there is much to talk about in reference to saving or advancing democracy
in the U.S. before worrying about foreign interference in the electoral arena.
ht
The United States’
political system, we are told repeatedly, is the gold standard for the world.
By Harry Targ | The Rag Blog | October 21, 2014
I never liked comedienne Joan Rivers who died recently. But her
famous one-line introduction to talk show interviewers and stand-up
performances is a powerful reminder that certain subjects might be dangerous to
discuss in polite company. Whether the United States’ political system is a
democratic one is such a subject.
Everything we
Americans have learned since infancy suggests that the United States is a
democracy. In fact, the United States political system, we are told repeatedly,
is the gold standard for the world.
The United States does not meet broadly
endorsed criteria for a democracy.
Reflecting on these five elements of democracy might lead to a
more sober understanding of the United States’ political system than what most
people learned in school (from kindergarten through graduate programs in
political science). Particularly, looking at Reisinger’s last four features
might suggest that the United States does not meet broadly endorsed criteria
for a democracy.
Does the political system afford “genuine competition for
power?” The answer is no for a variety of reasons. Campaigns for office from
local through federal positions require enormous amounts of money. Supreme
Court decisions have enshrined the right of the wealthy (often the one percent)
to pour unlimited financial resources into elections. Koch Brothers affiliates
have even invested in local school board elections to influence school
curricula and give support to the privatization of education.
Funding of elections is reinforced by rules and regulations
limiting political participation to two parties. Also states, from Indiana,
Wisconsin and Michigan to the South and Southwest, have imposed rulings making
it harder for citizens to vote. Some voter suppression laws, sometimes
overturned by courts because of their egregious violation of constitutional principles,
have survived serious challenges (such as the Supreme Court decision to allow
the Texas disenfranchisement of an estimated 600,000 minority voters) at least
for the next election.
In the end money, institutionalized procedures, state laws, and
judicial decisions have undermined the possibility of competition for political
power.
Money, power, institutions, and media
propaganda conspire to limit
political participation.
political participation.
Everything that has been said above limits equal and mass
participation in politics. Money, power, institutions, and media propaganda
conspire to limit political participation and the entire weight of the
political system works to impair workers, minorities, young people, and the
elderly.
In the 1970s, Political Scientist Samuel Huntington wrote a
paper for the then influential foreign policy organization, The Trilateral
Commission, warning of the “danger of democracy.” The danger he identified all
across the globe was the “excess of democracy.” In other words, in the 1970s,
(and one would only surmise the condition is worse today) too much
participation in politics would challenge the status quo and stability.
Reisinger pointed out that some definitions of democratic states
(on his chart six of 25 entries) highlight “civil and other liberties that
restrict the sphere of state power within the society.” There is much anecdotal
evidence to suggest that in the United States local police have garnered vastly
increased power to arrest, charge, kill, and incarcerate more citizens on a per
capital basis than most countries in the world. The most overrepresented
targets of the expanding police state are young, African/American males but the
class character of the criminal justice system has been prevalent as well.
In addition federal government surveillance, criminal conduct by
the National Security Agency, and long-standing practices of the Federal Bureau
of Investigation to undermine and crush dissent have been significant features
of the historical landscape.
Fewer than 10 media conglomerates control most
of the information consumed
by the citizenry.
by the citizenry.
Finally, Reisinger has found some references in discussions of
democracy to “deliberation” on public policy to “promote the common good.”
Fewer than 10 media conglomerates control most of the information consumed by
the citizenry and think tanks generating “expert” analyses are bought and paid
for by corporations, government agencies, billionaires, and political parties.
Two recent stories have been ignored in the mainstream media.
First, the German government has decided to provide free college education to
all its citizens (thus eliminating crippling student debt). This is a policy
that should warrant discussion. Second, Cuba has transported a delegation of
160 Cuban health care professionals to Sierra Leone and expects to provide
another 260 for Liberia. The first delegation was sent before President Obama
announced a U.S. program of medical aid to West Africa.
It could be that if
Americans were aware of the special training received by medical personnel in
Cuba, particularly in Third World settings, they might suggest that United
States and Cuban collaboration would increase the effectiveness of ending the
threat of a spreading Ebola epidemic in Africa. These are just two policies
worthy of conversation in the United States. (To its credit The New York Times, on its opinion page on October 20,
2014, published an editorial entitled “Cuba’s
Impressive Role on Ebola.”)
In sum, the Joan Rivers one-liner is critical now. We need to
talk about the reality that the United States is not a democracy. And as a few
commentators have pointed out, democracy is dangerous. It is dangerous because
the people will be able to participate in the decisions that affect their
lives; class, race, and gender will not exclude participation in politics; and
the whole reason for democratic institutions is to “promote the common good.”
As Pennock put it the ideal democracy is one characterized by:
“Government by the people, where liberty,
equality and fraternity are secured to the greatest possible degree and in
which human capacities are developed to the utmost, by means including free and
full discussion of common problems and interests.” (J. Roland Pennock,
Democratic Political Theory, Princeton Press, 1979, 7)
To be clear, the United States is not a democracy. Progressives
who believe it is fool themselves at the peril of the country. BUT, rather than
disengagement, they should struggle all the harder “inside and outside”
conventional political processes to achieve it. And struggles for equality,
justice, and a sustainable environment are also struggles for democracy.
[Harry Targ is a
professor of political science at Purdue University and is a member of the
National Executive Committee of the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy
and Socialism. He lives in West Lafayette, Indiana, and blogs at Diary of a Heartland Radical. ]
