Wednesday, December 15, 2021

Determinedly Defending Democracy

You probably have heard/read about last week’s “Summit for Democracy,” convened by President Biden via Zoom on Dec. 9-10. In spite of criticism from totalitarian governments (especially from China) and some domestic opponents, the President sought determinedly to defend democracy.

(Here is the link to the President’s closing remarks on Dec. 10.)

The Decline of Democracy

Freedom House is a non-profit, non-governmental organization in Washington, D.C., that conducts research and advocacy on democracy, political freedom, and human rights. Here is part of their report for 2021: 

Accordingly, President Biden warned world leaders at the Summit for Democracy on Dec. 9 of a “backward slide” in democracy around the globe and urged them to champion the form of government that needs concerted work to be sustained through an “inflection point in history.” (See here.)

The editors of the Dec. 15 issue of The Christian Century wrote of “Democracy’s death spiral” in the U.S., declaring that right now democracy “is under open attack.” (You can read that powerful editorial on p. 7 here).

And even Pope Francis has recently lamented that democracy has deteriorated dangerously as discontented people are lured by the “siren songs” of populist politicians who promise easy but unrealistic solutions. (The Pope expressed that sentiment on Dec. 4 as reported by Reuters.)

The Threat to Democracy

The biggest domestic threat to U.S. democracy in everyone’s lifetime was the attempted coup by Donald Trump and his fanatical supporters on January 6 of this year. But according to Barton Gellman, January 6 was practice for what is coming. 

Gellman (b. 1960) was on the staff of The Washington Post for 21 years, but now is a staff writer at The Atlantic. His cover story for the Jan./Feb. 2022 issue of that venerable magazine (founded in 1857) is “Trump’s Next Coup Has Already Begun.”

It is becoming increasingly clear from the indefatigable work of the January 6 Committee that the events on that volatile day at the Capitol were not due to outside rabble-rousers. It clearly was an inside job, that is, plotted from inside the White House.

An opinion piece in the Dec. 14 issue of The Washington Post is titled “Trump’s PowerPoint coup plotters were crackpots. We may not be so lucky next time.”

In that article, columnist Dana Milbank quips that then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, now being held in contempt of Congress (for his refusal to testify), “would more properly be held in contempt of competence.”

Milbank concludes by saying that on 1/6/21 “democracy was saved only by the bumbling of the coup plotters.” Next time, though, “we may not be so lucky.”

The Defense of Democracy

To a large extent, the defense of U.S. democracy is up to the Congress—and up to us voters who elect the 535 voting members of Congress. That is why next year’s election is so important. All 435 members of the House will be elected, of course, and 34 Senate seats will be decided.

But now the changes in election procedures in numerous states jeopardizes a truly democratic election next year.

The President was determinedly defending democracy at the Summit for Democracy last week. Now he must do everything necessary to defend U.S. democracy in 2022 and beyond.

Addendum: What about Democracy in the Church?

This article has been about the form of government employed, or rejected, by nation states. But what about churches, either as denominations or as local congregations? As a baptist (lower case intended), I am a strong advocate of democracy in church government.

I wonder, though, about the contradiction in the thinking of people who are advocates of democracy in the national government but have no qualms about accepting a hierarchical, non-democratic form of government for churches.

For example, is the completely hierarchical (authoritarian?) structure of the Roman Catholic Church, for example, in direct contradiction to the Pope’s good word about political democracy?

9 comments:

  1. I didn't read Heather Cox Richardson's "Letter" she posted last night after midnight until after I made this post, but it gives a more detailed analysis of the issue at hand than my article, and I recommend reading her post:
    https://heathercoxrichardson.substack.com/p/december-14-2021

    ReplyDelete
  2. For whatever reason, I have received few comments today. The first one received (before 9 a.m.) was a thoughtful one, though, as Thinking Friend Vern Barnet's always are. He wrote mostly about the addendum of today's post:

    "Structures, like bishops and constitutions, give needed weight to the wisdom of tradition to balance the fever of the moment. What might seem like a hierarchical structure may in fact protect democracy over time.

    I'm not fan of papal infallibility, rarely used, and I don't know enough about how the Roman Church actually works to comment. I think I do know enough about extreme congregational polity from my years as a Unitarian Universalist clergyman, and enough about various lay roles in the Episcopal Church, at the parish and diocesan level (the national level works similarly), to say that both have merit, the former appearing to be more democratic than the latter. In practice, I do not think congregational polity is more democratic than the episcopal structure.

    I really admire the Episcopal structure which involves joint government by bishops and laity, working together. The deliberate, thoughtful, prayerful changes in the Church, actually quite dramatic in recent times, and over the course of centuries in the Anglican tradition, have often led to firm agreements because of the respectful process used.

    I suppose there is merit in the presbyterian form of polity as well, but I don't have confidence to offer much of an opinion about it.

    I value your citations about endangered democracy, as I do the columns of Thomas B. Edsall, as for example, https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/15/opinion/republicans-democracy-minority-rule.html .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Vern, for your comments. As you would probably guess, I don't agree with the close of your second paragraph, but I won't write any more about that here, or now.

      I haven't known of Thomas Edsall, but I was impressed by his erudite article you linked to (although it was so long I didn't read it all closely). I was happy to learn about Mari Kawakatsu, the young Japanese scholar who is a Ph.D. candidate at Princeton U.

      Delete
  3. Then just before noon, Thinking Friend Glenn Hinson in Kentucky sent these brief comments regarding the main part of today's article:

    "A splendid blog, Leroy! We must do everything we can to retain control of both houses by Democrats. The future of democracy depends on it."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Dr. Hinson, for your affirming words.

      The problem I wrestle with is what, in reality, can we ordinary citizens--and especially old guys like us--do to make a difference. At the very least, we can speak up and speak out, which is what I have tried to do with this blog post, although I realize that most of my readers basically agree with what I wrote.

      Delete
  4. Last night on the Rachel Maddow Show, June and I heard Sen. Warnock make a powerful call for action to stem the erosion of democracy. Here is the link to three minutes of that interview.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCfT3wl9IqQ

    ReplyDelete
  5. When I opened my email inbox early this morning, I was pleased to see the following thoughtful email from Jim Koger, a local Thinking Friend whom I have seldom heard from.

    "I always hesitate to respond on your well formed thoughts on your blog posts. I appreciate them and the links with supporting materials. A few partially formed observations / opinions.

    "I probably don't take the January 6th attacks and QANON movement seriously enough. It just seems so far outside reason and I am so far removed from someone actually taking control of our government by anything other than democratic vote, that I have a hard time taking it seriously. People were hurt and our politicians were in real danger, but would the country stand by while a radical group took control of our government? Would our military and other governmental leaders really follow their orders as a legitimate government?

    "I do think the scary thing is that there is so much apathy and so few people vote -- either not thinking it will matter or not caring. And the graph in your post is surprising and something I should go a little deeper with. One of the few positive things about the Trump presidency -- as scary and divisive as some of the ideologies were, there did seem to be a lot more discussion and people waking up to engage.

    "With respect to democracy as a form of 'governing' the church, as a Roman Catholic, I guess I'm either more accepting or less skeptical of it having lived with it all my life. I get that there's an administrative function of the church organization, but I see the church's main function as spiritual and moral direction. And while we always have individual humans that abuse their power (and in Catholicism, I think clericalism is a problem), I do think for the most part, bishops and priests dedicate their life to trying to discern God's direction and shepherding the flock. And like Vern points out, while we bristle at the Pope's infallibility, it has rarely been used. By far the norm is the collegial form of decision making by the bishops.

    "Whether democracy or the Church's hierarchy, there will always be things we disagree with -- that doesn't mean the system isn't working. Heck, there were a lot of people that voted for Trump (both times) for a variety of reasons (the radical stuff he was about, the supreme court justices, conservative economics) -- even if I disagreed with a lot of them. And there are things I disagree with in the Church -- but I often understand the position of those holding the different viewpoints and am glad there are 2,000 bishops trying to discern God's will and guiding us on these things. And usually feel the popes have a deep theological perspective. Pope Francis' encyclical and homilies are a great source of spiritual reflection for me."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Jim, for reading my blog post and then taking the time to write and post substantial comments. It was good to hear from you.

      To make just one response to what you wrote, what worries me about Jan. 6 and the threat to American democracy in general is not primarily the wrongheaded thinking and actions of groups like QAnon but the thinking and actions of the Republican Senators and Representation in the U.S. Congress who are not just anti-Democratic but increasingly, it seems, anti-democratic. The biggest threat to our nation's democracy comes not from the fringe groups but rather from those in the seat of power. I think all of us need to take that threat more seriously than we have up to this point.

      Delete
  6. I'm quite sure Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne, Jr., hadn't read the last paragraph (or any, of course) of my blog post, but yesterday evening his opinion piece posted on the Post's website was titled, "President Biden, push the voting bills now." And this is his opening sentence: "It’s time to make it all about democracy."

    See https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/12/15/president-biden-push-voting-bills-now/

    ReplyDelete