April 3, 2018--"How Democracies Die"

In a powerful book of that name, distinguished Harvard professors of government, Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, worry that the election of Donald Trump is unleashing his and America's totalitarian impulses.

They set their analysis in a comparative context with considerable attention paid to the decline and at times death of democracies in, among other countries, Mussolini's Italy, Hitler's Germany, Peron's Argentina  Chavez's Venezuela,  Pinochet's Chile, Erdogan's Turkey, and Marcos's Philippines.

But the central focus is on the history of threats to democracy in the United States--the Civil War; the post-Reconstruction, Jim Crow era of institutionalized racism; the McCarthy threat; and now Trumpian times.

About America their analysis includes the gathering number of ways Trump is challenging the very notion of democracy itself and how he is systematically undermining it further by exploiting people's fears of the "other" and the internal and external dangers that they see around them, including a rigged electoral system, a corrupt judiciary, an unfettered press, a compromised legislative process, a debasement of our culture, and the political opposition treasonous. 

The book, though comfortably readable, includes a great deal of data to advance its arguments, including some that are unusual, even quirky but metaphorically illuminate the nature of the problem and its near total reach.

From the chapter, "The Unraveling," about our growing polarization--

Consider this extraordinary finding: In 1960, political scientists asked Americans how they would feel if their children married someone who identified with another political party. Four percent of Democrats and five percent of Republicans reported they would be "displeased."  

In 2010, by contrast, 33 percent of Democrats and 49 percent of Republicans reported feeling "somewhat or very unhappy" at the prospect of inter-party marriage. 

Being a Democrat or a Republican has become not just a partisan affiliation but an identity. 

(Iyengar, Sood, and Lelkes, "Affect, Not Ideology: A Social Identity Perspective on Polarization")

None of this will help one sleep at night, but we need to be warned and find ways to resist.

November 17, 2017--Betty's Concerned About Me

"You're not yourself," Betty said, calling from Maine.

"Not even a hello?" I said.

"You know I'm busy, working three jobs and all. I don't always have time for niceties."

"I know that, love. It's just so unusual to hear from you after we relocate to New York. Also, you caught me off guard and I was moved by your concern. I'm not good at handling people being concerned about me, as much as I appreciate it. But," I added, "I'm OK. I mean, I think I'm OK . . ."

"Well I do read the things you write. And the one the other day about you're not feeling happy in New York upset me. To think of the two of you not being happy."

"I appreciate your concern. I really do. I was just having a down day."

"Sounded like more than that. In fact, I've been sensing you've not been yourself for some time. From even before the storm and the trees down and power outages and that crazy guy who slammed his car into yours."

"True, all of that was upsetting. Especially the car business. He came close to really injuring Rona. I think that . . . I mean . . . feeling exposed and vulnerable just at the end of our time here--I mean there, in Maine--set me back. But the bottom line, as time goes by, I'm less able to handle change, including coming back to New York or, in the spring also, returning to Maine. As much as I love it there." 

I took a deep breath. "Then of course there's what's going on in the rest of the world."

"I've been sensing all of that," Betty said. I could hear her taking a deep draw on her cigarette. She was on her break.

"You know it's funny to hear you say that. What's going on in the world is profoundly upsetting. You know me, how I try to be optimistic. I'm always looking for ways to come up with the best explanations for even the most dire situations. And how I try to find ways to fix things. But then Rona the other morning, we were having breakfast in Cafe Rona, asked if I believed we were coming to the end. 'Not the Big End you sometimes write about,' she said, 'I'm not becoming one of those Rapture people waiting around for End Times. I mean,' she said, 'the end of the system. The end of our democracy. Is our system strong enough to resist the direction in which it feels like we are heading?'

"That really shook me up," I said, "Rona's not inclined to think that way. She's also a problem solver. She too thinks we can figure out whatever we need to figure out."

"To tell you the truth it's feelings of these kind that are coming through on most of the things you've been writing recently. Not the funky pieces like those audiology tales, but the political stuff."

"Could be true," I said.

"And it's not primarily the content part--the pieces on Trump and the Russians and the Virginia and Alabama elections are right on. That's the point-of-view part. The concern I have is with the writing itself."

"The writing?"

"Yeah. It feels less confident, less energetic, more squeezed out with effort than inspired." She paused to see what I might say.

"Well, first of all, I appreciate your feeling that some of my stuff is--or has been 'inspired.' Your word. And to tell you the truth I have at times been feeling weary and maybe that what's coming across. Things are not flowing the same way. I've attributed it to aging. Of course. My favorite place to go when I feel anything changing."

"How many of these things have you written?"

"About 3,200."

"And how long have you been doing this?"

"More than 12 years."

"And how old are you?" Before I could say or lie, she said, "Scratch that. I don't think it's that. Aging. Maybe just a part of it is. I think it may be more that you're feeling overwhelmed. Overloaded." She paused, "Like the rest of us. That's what he's doing to us."

"He?"

"Who else--Trump. It feels like he's trying to be the last man standing. The last person. He pummels us daily. There's always something waiting that we have to deal with. He's great as setting the daily agenda. Usually with ridiculous things like his latest name for Kim Jong-un. He called him 'short and fat' the other day. So we have to engage with that. We have to take it seriously because he's the president and has the ability to get us into a big war with North Korea." 

I said, "I'm exhausted just thinking about the past week. We even had to deal with his crazy thing Wednesday with the water bottle. Like he was channeling Marco Rubio who had his own water issues. It's as if Trump has a huge reference library of things from the past that he can dip into and get us all agitated about one more time while he sits back and husbands his energy. He's trying to win by wearing us down to helplessness. He's more than 70 years old, doesn't sleep, is grossly overweight, and eats crap. Yet there he is every day full of piss and vinegar while the rest of us are feeling exhausted."

"I can see that in the things you've been writing," Betty said, "Again, less in the content, more in the lack of flow and energy in some of your pieces."

"I pride myself," I said, "in being persistent. I've said through the years that much of what I've been able to accomplish is the result of  refusing to give up, pressing on when others may flag. To outlast people. So here we are faced with things of much greater consequence trying to deal with the master of distraction, agenda setting, and persistence who's full of narcissistic energy."

"This could be what's happening," Betty said. "I feel it in your writing and maybe it's also responsible for the malaise that feels so widespread."

"Let's assume this is true," I said, "That would make things more dangerous. At a time when maybe our democracy is at risk those who dread and oppose what's unfolding are beginning to run out of gas. I put it this way--those who oppose this--because there are some who are happy about what's going on. Too many. They don't value democracy. They want a strongman to take care of them. In trade, they're willing to surrender their freedom. But those of us who do value freedom better get rested up and recharged because there are these threats and there's a long way to go until the next election--a year--and who knows what we'll have to deal with between now and then. Even tomorrow."

"I have to go in a minute," Betty said, "But I have one more thing to mention--we'd better hope that that Roy Moore is defeated in Alabama. To put him down and that Bannon who is behind him, to reject them is really important. There's about a month to go before the election and related to that I liked that piece of yours about how liberals have to get off our butts and work hard to take back our country. Minimally, everyone should send $50, a $100 to his opponent's campaign. Doug Jones's. And we have to commit ourselves to never giving up, no matter how tired or frustrated we feel because that's what Trump and Bannon and their others are counting on--exhausted, we'll simply surrender."

"That's never going to happen," I said.

"That's the optimist in you," Betty said with a smoky laugh.

December 20, 2016--Trumpian Times

With exactly one month to go before Donald Trump is inaugurated, there is already evidence that "the system" is working." As it has during our entire history.

Yes, I know, but keep reading.

This may not please born-in-America radicals who, right or left, want to see the system overthrown and replaced by their own version of libertarian or authoritarian utopias. But we have weathered various forms of dangerous times and one way or the other came out the other side. Changed, but fundamentally intact.

The latest concerns about the strength of the system involves worry that with Trump as president democracy is threatened. In Sunday's New York Times Review section, Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt wrote--

Donald Trump's election raised a question that few Americans ever imagined asking: is our democracy in danger? With the possible exception of the Civil War, American democracy has never collapsed. . . . Yet past stability is no guarantee to democracy's future survival.

They calm down a bit and then conclude--

American democracy is not in imminent danger of collapse. If ordinary circumstances prevail, our institutions will most likely prevail, our institutions will most likely muddle through a Trump presidency.

This leaves the implication that though collapse is not, in their word, "imminent," if there is a crisis of 9/11 proportions, they wonder out loud what a president "with authoritarian tendencies" will do.

This concern/fear conforms to what I continue to hear from progressive friends.

For example I was stopped at the elevator the other day by a neighbor who we know to be totally rational and unflappable. A very successful  commodities trader. He leaned uncharacteristically close so as not to be overheard--though there was no one in sight--and in whispers shared his dystopian vision of what an unfettered Donald Trump will bring down upon us. It didn't take him very long to evoke reminders of strongmen such as Mussolini and Hitler.

I must admit, I tuned him out not wanting to have my day spoiled or my opinion about his rationality impeached.

And then when I returned from doing a raft of chores there were three emails from friends equally agitated. One concluded with fear about what that "psycho facist" is planning for America.

I tapped out a few things in response but had no illusion that there was anything I could say that would help him get through this. Except, I suppose, agree, though I suspect not even that would help.

Another friend just today wrote about her fear that the promiscuous Republican Congress will "roll over" for whatever Trump wants to do, including ending Social Security and Medicare, both of which she and her husband depend upon. "If the Electoral College or federal courts don't stop him--and I mean soon-it will be the end of the system and we will begin to look like Syria."

Since she is an American history buff, here's a portion of what I wrote back to her--

You know even more than I that the so-called "system" was designed by our Founders to include all sorts of checks and balances to assure that the United States would never be headed by a monarch, dictator, or tyrant. Having lived under that sort of rule, they made sure that the Constitution limited the power of the presidency by assigning most authority to Congress and the states. 

Though since the mid 20th century more power than ever has accrued to the president, Congress, with the assistance of the increasingly powerful federal courts, still can undo anything they deem to be overreaching or unconstitutional. 

Franklin Roosevelt discovered this when Congress refused to go along with his plan to "pack" the Supreme Court. He didn't like their decisions to curtail some of his favorite New Deal programs. FDR was very popular but Congress ultimately limited his authority. 

When in the 1950s, Senator Joseph McCarthy was amassing power due to his unfettered pursuit of alleged Communist infiltration of the federal government, just when it looked as if he might win the Republican nomination for president and even the election, the press and a bipartisan coalition of members of Congress stepped in to censure him and in that way pushed back successfully to thwart his demagogic appeal. 

And of course there was Richard Nixon who turned the federal government into a criminal enterprise. Eventually he was impeached and forced to resign the presidency.  

I could go on but want at the end to mention evidence that Congress, under the control of Republicans, even before Trump is sworn in, is moving to investigate the Russian hacking of the recent election. Something Trump does not want Congress to do. Ignoring him, they are making plans to proceed. Among other things, it's also a muscle-flexing signal to him not to take them for granted.

So, my friend, try to keep one eye on history and the other on Trump because he may need to be resisted when he moves beyond talk and Cabinet nominations and begins to actually do things. Until proven otherwise, I'm betting on the "system" to prevail.