Is our democracy in danger?
We, as a Nation, just celebrated our 242nd birthday. So this seems an opportune time to assess how our democracy is doing. Can we continue to be that bright, shining light on the hill to which other countries aspire? Or are our best democratic days over as we spiral downward under the weight of polarization and dissension? Two political scientists have recently written a thoughtful book to help in understanding our present circumstances. The book is How Democracies Dieby Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt. They provide some sobering observations about our present state of governance.
On the face of it, the thought that our democracy is in danger seems ludicrous. We have an enduring Constitution, national values of freedom and equality, a historically strong middle class, high levels of wealth and education, and a diverse, private sector. Yet democracies can be fragile. Sometimes they die in a quick and dramatic fashion through military power or coercion. Since the end of the cold war, the more common method of demise is through the democratic processes themselves. Elected officials use the very processes that brought them to power to subvert and destroy their opponents. This is often done slowly with barely visible steps until it becomes too late.
How can democratic institutions guard against such take-overs? Levitsky and Ziblatt say there are two major tests needed to rise up against authoritarian rule. The first is for political leaders, particularly political parties, to stand up against the demagogue. They must isolate them and prevent them from gaining power. America has seen its share of demagogues—Joseph McCarthy, Huey Long, and George Wallace—just to name a few. Then, national leaders successfully neutralized these individuals—often through courageous actions.
Should an authoritarian individual make it to power, the second test is will the new leader subvert the democratic institutions, or will he/she be constrained by them? Here norms (i.e. the democratic rules of the game) become critical. Authoritarian leaders will often subvert the rules curtailing civil liberties, denying the legitimacy of opponents, neutralizing or destroying the media, or tolerating violence. For a democracy to work, rival politicians have to accept each other as legitimate, loyal citizens who love their country. They also need to show self-restraint or forbearance. That is, not deploying extreme measures to the hilt. Our constitutional system cannot work unless all parties show some level of self-restraint. Constitutional checks and balances may help, but restrained, responsible leadership is what will ultimately save us.
Levitsky and Ziblatt contend that we are failing the first test when we look to authoritarian individuals for leadership. These authoritarian leaders challenge established democratic norms, and this can be dangerous because democratic norms are often vulnerable to polarization. If this polarization becomes too extreme, then rival parties begin to view each other as dangerous enemies. Losing becomes unacceptable. Self-restraint is abandoned, and each party uses every means necessary to win. Under these conditions established norms are abandoned. Extreme partisan polarization has already begun to eviscerate our democratic norms, and this started long before Donald Trump. We have seen it with the rise of the filibuster, the refusal to raise the US debt limit, and the increasing use of executive orders by both sides. Also, the refusal to take up the nomination of Supreme Court nominee Merrick Garland violated a 150 year old norm.
America today may not be on the brink of a coup or a civil war, but our differences are deep and go beyond disagreements over just taxes or healthcare. They are racial and cultural. Fifty years ago both parties were predominantly white and religious. Advances in civil rights, immigration, and the movement of religious conservatives to the Republican Party have now created two distinct parties—one predominantly white and Christian, the other secular and ethnically diverse. These differences are contributing to Constitutional hardball as the new norm in politics. The challenge for all of us is: how do we prevent this intense polarization from destroying our Constitution and democratic institutions? Unfortunately, there are no simple answers. However, if we cannot overcome these deep animosities, then our democracy will be at risk—whether Donald Trump is or is not President.
R. Thomas DeLoe is the vice-chair of the organization Democracy for America. He lives in Gettysburg.