DIVERSITY IS THE KEY TO DEMOCRACY

 

The historical linkages between the various English peoples that founded America and our present political and cultural conflicts have always fascinated me. It is naïve to believe that modern hostilities result solely from Donald Trump, social media, and/or radical cancel culture views on racism and women’s rights.

Many of the issues we argue about each day are spawned by our history.  In fact, a trail of tribal breadcrumbs goes back 300 years when America was in its infancy.  Understanding our initial colonization can help us to comprehend modern America.

The premise discussed in this commentary is hardly original. Credit must be given to the classic historical work by David Hackett Fischer, Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America, 1989, Oxford University Press. In addition, a recent Joe Klein essay, Why the Past is Never Past that appeared in the Sunday October 17, 2021 NYT, revived my interest in Fisher’s important study. For those readers who are not familiar with these sources, I will summarize and comment.

The Joe Klein essay has its eye on the map of our nation during the pandemic when he observes “the daily graphs of COVID-19 cases and vaccinations-the diagonal slash through Appalachia and the South from the Ozarks and Texas, where cases soared; to the high vaccination rates in New England, make it clear that the divide between maskers and anti-maskers, vaxxers and anti-vaxxers is as old as Plymouth Rock. It is deeper than politics, it is cultural.”

To get to this conclusion, we must return to Albion’s Seed which tackles the question: Why do certain regions in America have different cultural characteristics? Fischer identifies four original folkways that were radically different, each contributing an essential strain in shaping modern America.

New England.  First, the great migration of English Puritans, middle class Englishmen ruled by an elite of Puritan ministers, populated New England in the 1630s. Relative homogeneity, stable families and a balanced gender ratio marked this conservative folkway. It sought strict piety by instituting harsh institutional control and regulation over all manner of domestic living.

Tidewater Virginia.  Second, Royalist Cavaliers, pro-crown and Anglican, came from the elites of Southwest England. They were actively recruited to lord over large Virginia estates where 75% of the population were in the first place indentured servants and later African slaves. Society was hierarchical.  Liberty included the right to rule over others and the freedom to be unequal.

Delaware Valley.  Third, Quakers from Northern England counties settled the land surrounding Philadelphia.  The Quaker culture valued commerce, industry and a pluralistic society of equality over Puritan unity or Cavalier hierarchy.  The acceptance of different views encouraged political parties. Religious liberty, non-violence and antislavery prevailed in the Quaker folkway.

The Southern Backcountry.  Last, a large impoverished group of immigrants from England’s Northern borderlands and Southern Scotland sought refuge in the hills along the spine of the Appalachian Mountains. The folkways they brought with them were structured around a culture of retaliation and retribution. Politics were marked by independent “men of influence” like the future Andrew Jackson. The Appalachian conception of freedom stressed personal autonomy and distrust for governmental authority.

When one considers the New England ethic to “follow the rules” and its contrast with the Appalachian culture of “there are no rules,” it is no small miracle that we have made it this far as a nation.  Moreover, after reading the best-selling memoir Hillbilly Elegy by J.D. Vance (who is now running for Congress as a Trump supporter), it is clear that these folkway differences are alive and well. Puritan organization predicted the New Deal and “freedom from want.” The Scots Irish wanted no part of this bargain if it meant curtailing individual liberties.

Likewise, the call for social and economic equality espoused by the Quakers was never accepted in the South.  Instead, the Southern folkway that championed an aristocratic hierarchy would lead to white supremacy and systemic racism following the Civil War.

I would add a fifth and sixth folkway to the four developed in Albion’s Seed that help explain why we have not experienced continuous civil war. The fifth would be the emancipation and citizenship afforded to Africans brought to America against their will. The sixth and last is the immigration of citizens from Southern Europe and later from ethnic groups from around the world.

Once America became more diverse, the fractious folkways of the original British migration had less influence. Each original folkway was more concerned with protecting its ancestral turf than establishing control over the country as a whole. The continuing diversity of culture and new ideas made our constitutional republic stronger over time.  

In support of my observation, I would point to those countries that have  remained ethnically homogeneous. Germany and Japan before WWII, Russia and China since the war are examples of nations with little cultural diversity. Each of them fostered authoritarian regimes based on ethnic supremacy with total control over their populations.

When I read the latest issue of Pittsburgh Magazine and reviewed the 2021 award winning class of “40 under 40,” the accomplishments and diversity of the candidates was impressive. Among these young adults are several from small villages in India, Pakistan, Africa and the Far East. Each is making a difference with their unique creativity.

As long as new folkways continue to be introduced into the American landscape, our democracy will remain a gloriously messy business but it will thrive.

 

 

 

 

 

 

A FAIRYTALE WITH A HAPPY ENDING

The excellent book, The Constitution of Knowledge, Jonathan Rauch, The Brookings Institute, 2021, inspired this commentary

Once upon a time, the country of Acadia was established. The new nation’s founders believed in a democratic form of government. They wrote a constitution to guarantee that both individual liberties and the rule of law would govern the new land. This binding legal document imposed checks and balances on the elected leaders.

As the country grew, disagreements developed among the different tribes that lived within the borders of Acadia. The large land mass was very diverse in language, ethnicity, religion and cultural practices. The citizens who lived in the large cities came to value knowledge, merit and the diversity of many different tribes. However, the rural tribes became distrustful of city dwellers and feared that the rustic way of life was being both ignored and threatened. Moreover, rural tribes, immigrants themselves, were opposed to permitting foreigners the right to immigrate into Acadia to share in its vast resources.

Despite the disagreements, the constitution of laws allowed strong governmental institutions to develop, and Acadia thrived for many years. Leaders with moderate liberal views were elected, often followed by the election of moderate conservative leaders. At times, radical political tribes sought power, but they were quickly absorbed into the moderate political parties. The political and social changes that took place were adopted slowly, with vigorous debate and compromise by all interest tribes. The democratic struggle between the state and the people was healthy. It never gravitated toward the twin evils of authoritarian state authority or into political chaos brought on by mass rebellion that plagued other nations.

Over the years, Acadia was slowly transformed from an agrarian society into an industrial one. The conflicts between rural tribes, who remained fixed in an agricultural culture and the urban areas that adopted an industrial way of life, became more pronounced. It became difficult for the constitution and the democratic institutions to keep a moderate elected government in place. There was increasing pressure for the state to move sharply to the right or the left. Thankfully, Acadia was equally split between voters on each side of the debate. This helped to maintain the appearance of order.

In addition to the traditional conflict between rural and urban citizens, conservative tribes attracted Christian citizens with what became known as a “family values” agenda. This platform wanted Acadia to become a Christian nation that would ignore the constitutional mandate of the separation between church and state.

The deathblow to Acadia’s long running system of democratic government was the dawning of the Information Age. Within several decades, access to and control of information became the defining characteristic of society. This was initially thought to be good for democracy because all the tribes would have a vast store of knowledge equally available to them. In fact, the information age fostered social media where each citizen could express opinions that would go viral and be viewed by millions of others. Untrue diatribes that encouraged negative emotions of hate and distrust replaced vetted facts on which all could agree.

Unscrupulous politicians began to run for office using social media as their path to victory. The message was about the individual leader. The leader was adept at communicating untrue authoritarian “us against them” themes to his followers. Acadia was politically and socially split in half.  Knowledge became irrelevant, and the constitutional institutions began to weaken.

Many thought that civil war was inevitable and that Acadia would become a failed nation.  Finally, wise citizens, both conservatives and liberals, gathered and convened a second constitutional convention. The goal was to develop a new “constitution of knowledge” that would serve as a defense of truth and avert the coming storm.

The constitution of knowledge was designed to manage disagreements among the tribes.  As in the original constitution, speech was free to flourish. What changed was a system that vetted speech before the tribes accepted it as knowledge. The constitution of knowledge became law following a national referendum.

Under the new constitution, views or opinions that an individual wanted to be accepted as knowledge were submitted for peer review. The medical professionals vetted medical questions; legal scholars the legal disagreements; respected sociologists the social issues; and religious leaders and philosophers the moral dilemmas. However, the constitution of knowledge was not limited to professionals.  It also included journalists, law enforcement, election administrators, union officials, corporate leaders and any other evidence- based group where theories required testing and justification from different points of view. Everyone was still entitled to his or her own opinion, but the community as a whole agreed on what constituted knowledge.

When a proposition was finally given credence as true, it was always subject to change as the facts supporting the proposition changed. In this way, the proven scientific method that existed for centuries was adopted to manage disagreement among the tribes. There was now a welcome, level playing field for conflict, which rejected misinformation and provided a defense for truth.

The constitution of knowledge became widely utilized in Acadia. The nation became ruled by its values and common practices that were fair to all of the tribes. Disruptive trolls and divisive politicians who previously thrived on hate, fear and disinformation disappeared from the land.  The information age became a positive force that propelled Acadia forward into many years of peace and prosperity.

 

DEMOCRATS IN CONGRESS MUST FOCUS ON ELECTION LAWS AND VOTER’S RIGHTS

 

President Joe Biden and the Democratic controlled Congress are intent on getting legislation passed before their political support evaporates following the 2022 midterm elections. Democrats have reason to worry because their congressional majorities is slim, and typically, the party in power loses both House and Senate seats in the midterms. By January of 2023, the Democrat’s opportunity to effect meaningful change may be over.

Unfortunately, “going big” with the Democrat’s proposed “Building Back Better” (BBB) legislation is only possible with the vote of the 50^th senator. Because all Republicans and Democratic senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema have objections, the President’s package of new social programs cannot cobble together 50 votes. Moreover, these same two senators are not prepared to change the Senate cloture rule—which requires 60 members to end debate on most topics and move to a vote. The reality on the ground is that today’s Congress simply does not have the large Democratic majorities that permitted Presidents FDR in the 1930s and LBJ in the 1960s to pass groundbreaking social reforms.

It is time for the White House and the Democratic Party to stop seeking improbable, time-consuming legislative wins. Smaller victories are preferable to drawn out policy battles that offer little hope for success. The only issue that should be non-negotiable for Democrats is preventing Donald Trump and/or “Trumpism” from regaining the presidency. This alone is the largest threat facing our democracy since the Civil War.  To prevent a Trump resurgence, Democrats must step back and reset priorities leading up to the 2022 midterm elections.  Events that have transpired since President Biden took office must be part of the calculations moving forward.

First, Democratic legislative plans were upended this summer when the Delta variant of the pandemic swept across the country, again making COVID-19 the President’s number one priority. The White House was correct to devote additional resources to getting more Americans vaccinated in order to avoid a second public health crisis. The confusion over school openings and booster shots, as recommendations change week by week, makes the pandemic a slippery advisory of undefined duration. The pandemic resurgence could not be avoided, and legislative expectations must now be revised.

Second, Democratic moderates and progressives have been unable to compromise on the final architecture of the massive BBB legislative package. House moderates are eager to move forward with the “hard” infrastructure legislation, already passed by the senate, with a reduced version of the “soft” 3.5 trillion dollar BBB social package.  Progressives are insisting that BBB is non-negotiable and that it is impossible to make policy choices between child-care, the elderly, education, the climate crisis and immigration reform. In addition, Democrats cannot agree on a proposal to increase taxes to pay for the social package.

Third, the hope that following his defeat Trump would lose his political dominance over the Republican Party has not materialized. Trump has held his coalition together by finding enough loyalists willing to perpetuate the “big lie” that Democrats stole the national election. Trump has demonstrated enough influence to guarantee that his handpicked candidates can win Republican congressional primaries throughout the nation in 2022. This will be the springboard for him returning to national office in 2024 with an agenda of rewarding liars and punishing truth tellers who disagree with him.

Last week a well-known conservative, Robert Kagan, published an essay on the state of American democracy that sent shock waves through the political establishment. (Opinion: Our constitutional crisis is already here, Washington Post, September 23, 2021) Mr. Kagan believes that Donald Trump and his allies are willing to go to any length to ensure his victory in 2024 and that he must be stopped to preserve democracy.

Kagan believes that the Trump game plan to flood state legislatures with loyal supporters willing to change election laws, giving partisan Republicans the power to overturn election results in the next national election is already in place. Kagan writes, “The Trump movement is less about policies than about Trump himself. It has undermined the normal role of American political parties, which is to absorb new movements into the mainstream.” All citizens who value our system of government should read this well-reasoned commentary and be prepared to work tirelessly to defeat Trump.

The Democratic majority in Congress is razor thin. If a Democratic senator dies in a state with a Republican Governor, all bets are immediately off. The White House and Democrats in Congress should obtain the best deal they can on infrastructure, resolve the debt and budget issues as quickly as possible and move on to the real crisis - Republican attacks on election laws and voter’s rights. Republican leader Mitch McConnell has made it clear that his members will vote against every Democratic proposal. It is time to stop negotiating with Republicans and move forward with vigor.

President Biden wants to bring all of his campaign promises to fruition in one grand legislative package. However, even if the Democrats are successful, a Republican takeover of Congress in 2022 followed by a Trump victory in 2024 would quickly reverse many of these gains.

This must be the year to assemble a national legislative firewall around the state election offices to insure full and fair voting in both the 2022 mid-terms and 2024 national election. Without accomplishing this goal, democracy will lose the constitutional crisis that is already upon us.