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.

 

 

 

 

MAKING SENSE OF THE COUNTY GOVERNMENT INITIATIVES

Washington County citizens have reason to be overwhelmed by the flurry of initiatives launched by the Commissioners in recent months.  The three major projects are unique but easy to confuse. First, an election referendum to adopt a Government Study Commission; second, an expansion of human services functions in Washington County; and third, approval of an automated case management system for the county courts, have all been introduced.

To make matters more confounding is the misinformation being circulated by certain parties to derail the most deserving of these plans. This commentary will attempt to explain each the above initiatives, how they are related and how they differ.

Government Study Commission. This summer, the concept of a Government Study Commission progressed from a good idea (one that I have advocated for several years) to an actual ordinance placing the referendum to adopt the Study Commission before the voters on November 2. If Washington County ultimately adopts a Home Rule form of government, it would enhance the ability to make decisions based on local needs. Washington County would no longer be forced to follow a one-size-fits-all state code that is decided by state legislators.

In August, those interested in serving on the commission had a brief window to gather signatures on a petition backing their candidacy. On Election Day, voters will decide whether to adopt a Government Study Commission and on the same ballot will select eleven commissioners from among 51 candidates.  They will only serve if the vote to form the Commission is in the affirmative. 

The decision by the Commissioners to fast track a Government Study Commission was no doubt influenced by the deteriorating relationship between the Commissioners and the Washington County court system on one side and the Republican officials elected to administer the clerical Row Offices on the other. It is true that the Study Commission could advocate for elimination of these offices. One professional administrator, appointed by the courts and the commissioners, to perform these clerical functions, would replace partisan elected officials. However, it is important to keep in mind that an elected Study Commission would be tasked with examining all aspects of county government, not simply the future of the clerical Row Offices.

The process in adopting a Home Rule Charter is purposefully deliberate and involves public/voter input at all phases of the multiple stage proceeding mandated by state law.  Public meetings to solicit ideas will be held, research on other Pennsylvania Home Rule Counties conducted, and all options discussed. The Study Commission may decide to retain the existing governmental structure in which case the project is concluded. If the Commission drafts a new plan, only the Washington County voters can approve the proposed Home Rule Charter.

It is baffling to me that the Washington County Republican Party has mounted an all-out campaign to convince voters not to appoint a government study commission. In 2019, Republicans campaigned on the deficiencies in local government and the theft in the Clerk of Court’s office. Now that Republicans are in the majority in Washington County, they have the opportunity to play a meaningful role in developing a governmental structure that addresses their concerns. Instead, local Republicans have elected irresponsible officials to several of the Row Offices and refused to participate in a democratic process to improve local government.

Expansion of County Human Services. With a bipartisan decision at a recent meeting, Commissioners Diana Irey Vaughn and Larry Maggi delayed any move to reconfigure the county’s department of Human Services.  Commissioner Sherman, who proposed the unneeded and costly expansion, was not in agreement.  The plan for the new Human Services Department would include the hiring of eight new employees at an additional yearly cost of $544,000.00.  

In addition to the cost, the other well-founded criticism of the plan is that it is not needed and would disrupt years of building efficient human service organizations outside of county government. These non-profits (drug/alcohol, elderly/aging and others) have flourished under their independent leadership and have met the needs of Washington County residents.  In the sage words of recently deceased District Attorney, Gene Vittone, “Service delivery is working in the area of drug and alcohol. An old adage is applicable here. ‘If it isn’t broken don’t fix it.’ Let our team continue our good work.”

Automated Case Management System for the County Courts. The commissioners have approved the purchase of a comprehensive case management system that will integrate all court employees and courtrooms, including the functions of the clerical Row Offices, into one system. The county can utilize pandemic relief funds received from the federal government to pay for the installation. The federal courts and several forward-looking Pennsylvania counties have installed similar systems that have proven to be a significant cost reduction over time. Fewer clerks will be needed to process paper documents and storage costs will be reduced.  Litigants in the court system will save on legal fees because lawyers throughout the region will be able to file legal pleadings electronically.

In connection with the above county initiatives, I would like to make two observations.  First, the misguided attempt to reconfigure Human Services should be a topic reviewed by the Government Study Commission. This would give independent elected citizens the opportunity to make recommendations. Second, the court case management system will have a profound effect on the clerical Row Offices, whether they are replaced or remain in effect as elected offices.

 

GOOD THINKING IN AN IRRATIONAL WORLD

When Republicans are prepared to challenge every decision made by President Joe Biden, often before he announces a course of action, this thinking process is irrational. To a lesser extent, when Democrats support the President before thinking through the ramifications, this is not a rational exercise. In both cases it is easier and more emotionally satisfying to stick with the party line rather than modify a long held belief.

 

The number of partisan Republicans and Democrats comprise a large portion of the voting population and are relatively equal. Wide majorities in both parties – 75% of Democrats and 64% of Republicans – say those in the other party are more closed-minded than other Americans.  With these hardened battle lines, there is little room for a rational “peace table” to flourish.

 

How can it be that as humanity is reaching new heights of scientific understanding and information sharing it also appears to be losing its mind? How can our society that developed vaccines for Covid-19 in less than a year produce so much fake news, medical quackery and political conspiracy theorizing?

 

Given the fractured condition of the American polity it should come as no surprise that a rash of books on rationality will be published this fall. Steven Pinker, the best-selling author who has written extensively on human behavior, has released Rationality: What It Is, Why It Seems Scarce, Why It Matters (Viking). His thesis is that we actually think in ways that are sensible in the low-tech contexts in which we spend most of our lives. However, we fail to take advantage of the powerful tools of reasoning that are part of the human condition. These tools include logic, critical thinking, probability, correlation, causation and optimal ways to update beliefs. He concludes that developing these tools should become a standard part of the education curriculum to foster rational thinking at an early age.

 

Two philosophers have checked in on rationality with the recent publication of When Bad Thinking Happens to Good People: How Philosophy Can Save Us from Ourselves, by Stephen Nadler & Lawrence Schapiro (Princeton) This book reviews philosophy’s tools for better reasoning. The authors remind us that conspiracies and misinformation are not new and that some of our best strategies for dealing with them are not new either.  For example, epistemology (which addresses the nature of belief and knowledge) and ethics (the study of moral principles that should govern our behavior) can reduce bad thinking. Moreover, the book summarizes why philosophy’s millennia-old advice about how to lead a good, rational, and examined life may be the key for escaping our current predicament.

My favorite recent study on rationality is The Scout Mindset: Why Some People See Things Clearly and Others Don't, by Julia Galef (Portfolio). The author finds the best description of motivated reasoning as: “When we want something to be true we ask ourselves ‘Can I believe this.’ When we do not want something to be true we instead ask ‘Must I believe this’ searching for an excuse to reject it.”

This book keeps things simple by identifying two types of people. First are the “scouts” who achieve success by not defending one side of a contentious issue over the other. The scout method is to go out, survey the territory and come back with an accurate map. A scout must recognize when he/she has gone down the wrong road, be prepared to uncover blind spots, test assumptions and be willing to change course.

The rest of us have “soldier” mindsets.  From tribalism and bias to rationalizing in our personal lives and everything in between, loyal soldiers are driven to defend the ideas they most want to believe—and shoot down those they do not. Making scouts out of soldiers is equivalent to making independent thinkers out of Democrats and Republicans. It is the process of turning untrue opinions away from a soldier’s fear of negative defeat into the scout’s positive decision-making.  It is the open minded task of constructing the map of life with accuracy and fulfillment.

At the end of the day, there is little possibility that a majority of Americans will 

take to heart the advice in these books and reach a consensus on the major issues 

of the day.  One rational approach would be to stop arguing with those “soldiers” 

who are committed to irrational opinions and to stick with a positive message of 

well-developed and vetted facts in our public discourse. As time passes, reason 

and content that is true should win over public opinion.

I have found several sources of news to be above average in delivering rational, 

unbiased information. First, The News Hour with Shepard Smith on CNBC at 7 

pm is straightforward without the one-sided opinions found on other cable 

networks. Second, POLITICO is an online news source that covers American 

politics with excellent journalism that does not favor one party over the other.

There is no magic bullet that will cure us of bad thinking. Like weight loss and 

procrastination, we often identify the problem but choose the easier road of 

sticking with our routine. I will close with the advice of English philosopher John 

Locke: “It is ambition enough to be employed as a laborer in clearing the ground a 

little, and removing some of the rubbish that lies in the way to knowledge.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A WEALTH OF TALENT IN WASHINGTON COUNTY

 

“The meaning of life is to find your gift. The purpose of life is to give it away.”

— William Shakespeare

I was recently on a search committee to assemble a “dream team” of independent individuals to run for the Government Study Commission in the general election on November 2. This commentary will not focus on the Study Commission or the Row Office debacle or the pandemic. During our committee discussions, the array of talented individuals who live and work in Washington County overwhelmed me. Our county is truly a unique community that has reason to be proud of its citizens and their accomplishments.

What is most evident when one takes inventory of our local leaders is the number of qualified women who are responsible for all aspects of Washington County’s, political, legal, social and economic enterprises. While not quite the Amazon community of Greek mythology, Washington County women match their counterparts in skills and experience. Women are leaving their imprint on every endeavor throughout the community.

A few examples will highlight my point. At the head of the female pack is County Commissioner Chairman Diana Irey Vaughn. She has grown into her position as the most visible political figure in Washington County. While I often disagree with her conservative philosophy, there is no denying that she is willing to govern in a non-partisan fashion to improve Washington County. Her appointments to County Offices including Chief Clerk, Human Services and the law department, among others, have been women.  Most of the officials in the county’s clerical Row Offices are also women.

In the Washington County Court of Common Pleas, Judges Valerie Costanzo, Traci L. McDonald and retired Judge Katherine B. Emery continue the tradition of females in the judiciary.   At the Washington County Bar Association, Director, Kathy Sabol has transformed the WCBA  into a dynamic organization, often singled out as among the best in the Commonwealth. The WCBA is comprised of 480 attorneys and Judges, and 25% of its members are women.  Many of them contribute to organizations throughout the county.

Betsie Trew has served first as Executive Director and now as President  & CEO of the Washington County Community Foundation since 1998. Under her leadership, the assets of the Foundation have grown from less than $250,000 to more than $50 million. One of her goals is to help women advance through the ranks of nonprofit organizations and philanthropic giving. The present board of directors of WCCF includes eight dynamic women, all dedicated to helping those in need.

No local institution is more challenged and yet more important to the wellbeing of Washington County than our own Observer Reporter. No woman works harder than Executive Editor Liz Rogers.  Her staff insures that we receive a print newspaper each morning.  Ms. Rogers joined the paper in 1982 and worked her way “up the ladder” before assuming her present demanding responsibilities.  In addition to the OR, she oversees two other daily publications. In an era of reduced readership followed by major staff reductions, Washington County is among the few privileged communities still receiving a daily print newspaper.

In the field of education, women rule in Washington County. Until recent retirements, both Washington and Jefferson College and California University had female presidents. Many school district superintendents, principals, school board members and teachers are women.

In the area of nonprofit human services organizations, women abound in Washington County. The Drug and Alcohol Commission, Citizens Library, Teen Outreach, Commission on Aging, Food Bank, Communities Health Services, Literacy Council and the Symphony all have women directors or presidents. There are many other examples of dedicated female Washington County leaders who help insure that the health and welfare of our citizens remains in caring, competent hands.

While I have chosen to highlight female leadership within the county, of course many exceptional men have dedicated their careers to local public service as well. For all who make a commitment to serve, the pay is meager, and the hours are long.  The number of appointed local leaders who are at the top of their professions and yet decide to remain in Washington County is astounding. Many of them could easily leave for higher paying, more prestigious positions in larger communities.

At the municipal level of county government (mayors, supervisors, and council members), community volunteers (firefighters, nonprofits, schools and religious organizations) and commerce (business owners and their employees) are hundreds of Washington County residents who care deeply about their community. Few of these individuals receive the accolades they deserve.

Volunteer activities are especially noteworthy for providing a network of relationships and communications that influence good government. Without them giving freely of their time, Washington County would be a far less desirable place to live and work.

The more engaged communities are collectively, the healthier they become.   One of many examples is the willingness of Commissioners Diana Irey-Vaughn and Larry Maggi to let the voters decide on our form of local government at the general election on November 2.  This process is participatory, accountable, transparent, efficient, inclusive and is one that respects the rule of law.

Helen Keller once said: "The greatness of a community is most accurately measured by the compassionate actions of its members."  The local leaders and volunteers of Washington County, many with an impressive feminine footprint, give meaning to this thought for all of us.

 

POLITICAL POLARIZATION IS CAUSING THE BREAK-UP OF SOCIAL TRUST

Social trust is defined as trusting strangers we encounter in our day-to-day lives to follow certain social norms or fundamental moral expectations. With experience, we come to beleive that others will perform their appointed tasks with integrity and will not steal from us, not lie to us and not defraud us. Social trust is the glue that permits 333 million Americans to live together in a complex, diverse community. Unfortunately, in today’s society, many believe that social distrust of long established institutions and of our fellow citizens is the greatest threat to democracy in our nation.

Factors such as political corruption, racial/ethnic differences and economic inequality have always threatened social trust. What is new is the degree to which political polarization has also become a threat to social distrust, making it impossible for a healthy democracy to function.

Every day we observe out of control political polarization in action on cable news. On July 27, 2021, MSNBC and CNN were highlighting the emotional testimony of the capital police at the first Congressional hearing convened to determine the facts behind the January 6 insurrection at the Capitol. The witnesses described deadly attacks against them precipitated by the words and actions of then president Donald Trump.

At the same time, FOX NEWS and NEWSMAX were accusing House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of causing the Capitol riot. They also featured segments attacking the Justice Department for ignoring the criminal rights of the Capitol rioters, who were labeled political prisoners by the commentators. 

These two political views could not have been further apart in addressing an important national issue. Neither political tribe trusts the other to present the facts accurately or to understand the other’s position. What is new and frightening is that we not only distrust politicians from the other party, we distrust those who voted for the other party.

As evidence that political polarization has a growing negative impact on social trust, consider three necessary careers in America that have been transformed from non-controversial employment into partisan lighting rods. Two years ago working as a public health administrator, an election official or a middle school history teacher guaranteed that one could perform a mundane public function while remaining out of the public eye. Since the pandemic, all three positions have been vilified through political polarization, thereby increasing our social distrust.

Public health was the first occupation to be politicized.  In the early months of the pandemic, Rick Bright, the former director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, was removed from his federal position when he rejected pressure by Department of Health and Human Services officials to make hydroxychloroquine, touted by President Trump as a possible COVID-19 treatment, "widely available." More recently, a Missouri county health director left her job because of threats she received over measures put in place to curb the coronavirus pandemic, including a mask mandate. There are many other examples of trust in conscientious public health employees being challenged for partisan political motives.

Next to come under the public spotlight were state and local election officials. This occurred after the former president, while still in office,  attacked these government employees for refusing to disobey court orders and decertify election results. Public confidence in our elections often comes down to trust in nonpartisan election administrators. Since the 2020 election over 145 bills proposed by Republican state legislatures would reassign various powers of election officials to highly-partisan legislatures. These “legislative seizures” could threaten social trust by allowing elected lawmakers to overturn the will of voters and determine their own preferred winners of elections.

Lastly, public school history teachers recently became the political target of political polarization. Many educators want to present a balanced view of the history of American slavery, reconstruction, the Jim Crow era and slavery’s continuing impact on racism. Many parents who follow Republican talking points find this view of American history offensive. They are fighting to prevent this curriculum from being taught in the public schools, thereby perpetuating distrust in America’s story.

What is to be done to end this cold civil war we are waging against one another that has disintegrated social trust?  Primarily, we must confront the emotional urge to interpret all actions by the other side, political and non-political, as misguided. Thankfully, most social interactions are apolitical. We must not let our communities devolve into separate enclaves where citizens only live, work, shop and educate their children with members of their own political affiliation.

The one bright spot in promoting social trust has been the economy. Despite unprecedented high levels of political polarization, trust in capitalism and the American financial system has never been higher. After the recession, the progressive economist Joseph Stiglitz was quoted as saying: “It is trust more than money that makes the world go round.”

The supply of money has more than doubled since the recession and yet gold hording and other signs of economic mistrust are minimal. Economic expansion is fueled by trust in everything from on-line restaurant reviews to dating apps, car sharing and home sharing.

At its core, social distrust is sustained by the inability of many to accept a non-white majority in a country that once enslaved black people. We can only hope that this multi-generational prejudice can be offset by the move toward an open, sharing economy that views diversity as an asset.