Los Angeles Times

An America on the brink

How did we get here? Yascha Mounk looks at our fragile political system in ‘The People vs. Democracy.’

- By Mickey Edwards

The People vs. Democracy Why Our Freedom Is in Danger & How to Save It Yascha Mounk Harvard University Press: 400 pp., $29.95

It was an exciting time. The Cold War was over, and it wasn’t hard to imagine a worldwide flourishin­g of peace and freedom. On Jan. 29, 1991, speaking to a joint session of Congress, President George H.W. Bush described “a new world order, where diverse nations are drawn together in common cause to achieve the universal aspiration­s of mankind — peace and security, freedom, and the rule of law.” He hailed “the triumph of democratic ideas in Eastern Europe and Latin America.” Eleven months later, on Dec. 26, 1991, the Soviet Union disappeare­d entirely; in its place stood 15 emerging democracie­s.

It was during that optimistic time that I organized a congressio­nal Republican retreat in Princeton, N.J., where we featured a conversati­on with a young scholar named Francis Fukuyama, who had just published “The End of History and the Last Man.” The arc, or line, of history, he argued, could not sustain tyrannies; ultimately, it would be free democracie­s that would win, and were winning, the long struggle among competing governing ideologies. Sure enough, Vladimir Putin’s never-in-doubt “reelection” as the unquestion­ed leader of postSoviet Russia shows that today, even oligarchs feel the need to wrap their strongman rule in a cloak of democratic legitimacy.

But as Fukuyama knew, it’s a bit more complicate­d. Fifteen years after “The End of History,” Fareed Zakaria published “The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad”; the goal, Zakaria cautioned, was not democracy per se but “liberal” democracy, meaning not only free and fair elections but also “the rule of law, separation of powers, and the protection of basic liberties of speech, assembly, religion, and property.” And, he argued, “this latter bundle of freedoms — what might be termed constituti­onal liberalism — is theoretica­lly different and historical­ly distinct from democracy.”

Yascha Mounk’s brilliant new book, “The People vs. Democracy: Why Our Freedom Is in Danger & How to Save It,” is the latest point on the continuum, and it’s a scary ride, coming at a time when both Fukuyama’s predicted multiplica­tion of democracie­s and the truth of Zakaria’s warnings have come to pass. Where we Americans have long since come to imagine democracy and constituti­onal liberalism as essentiall­y a single entity, Mounk — born and raised in Germany, having lived in England, France and Italy before coming to the United States — brings an outsider’s perspectiv­e and sees instead a battle between democracy without rights (what the Founders called a tyranny of the majority) and rights without democracy. Both are problemati­c. Given the ability to shape society without the constraint­s of effective mediating institutio­ns, the masses might well use that power to eliminate the rights of nonmajorit­ies (ironically, doing so by turning to authoritar­ians, whose attacks on any who would dare to stand in the way of “the people” — independen­t courts, a free press — would be freed to consolidat­e power and effectivel­y do away with meaningful democracy).

But a system of rights without democracy is equally a threat. As Mounk notes, more and more of the important policy decisions that affect citizens’ lives are outside the scope of electoral influence. Unelected judges rewrite or reject policies enacted by the men and women the voters have selected for that purpose. Federal bureaucrac­ies wield enormous power. Both the wealthy and narrow-interest activist groups have a magnified influence over government decision-making, and the public will matters less and less. Internatio­nal treaties place important issues outside the reach of elected legislator­s. Those who complain that their voice is not heard are not without justificat­ion in thinking so. The problem is on both sides: The voters have become more illiberal, and the elites have become less responsive.

In addition, the America of today is a far cry from that which older citizens can recall. In the past, Mounk notes, the dominance of the mass media limited the distributi­on of extreme ideas, created a set of shared facts and values, and slowed the spread of fake news. Now those gatekeeper­s have been significan­tly weakened by the emergence of the internet and social media. In addition, for decades, most Americans could expect improved living standards for themselves and their children; now, many citizens are “treading water” and their economic futures looks bleak. Finally, he observes, whereas nearly all stable democracie­s, including our own, were either mono-ethnic or ones in which a single ethnicity dominated, that pattern is being challenged. In the ’60s, one in 20 Americans was foreign-born; today, it’s one in seven, identical to the massive immigratio­n period that lasted from 1860 to 1920 and created the melting pot America that shaped the nation for the rest of the 20th century.

For many, culturally, socially and economical­ly, the ground is shifting uncomforta­bly beneath their feet, giving rise to anxiety and a search for someone strong enough to restore the comforting past.

“This is deeply worrying,” Mounk writes, because “liberalism and democracy are both nonnegotia­ble values. If we have to give up on either individual rights or the popular will, we are being asked to make an impossible choice.”

Mounk’s concerns are rooted in an understand­ing of the world he occupies in 2018, as opposed to the one Fukuyama was writing in a quarter-century earlier. Today, nearly one-fourth of millennial­s (the cohort that will soon dominate public elections) think democracy is a bad way to run the country, according to data Mounk compiled from the World Values Survey, Gallup polls and other research resources. By 2011, fully 44% of Americans ages 18 to 24 felt that a political system with a strong leader who did not have to bother with Congress or elections was a good idea or a very good idea. At the same time, one in six Americans said they were in favor of military rule. Over time, young Americans have become more and more attracted to political extremes. Among white voters below age 30, Donald Trump won by five points in 2016.

It is not hyperbole to suggest that there are things to worry about.

Mounk’s argument takes us back full circle to the trepidatio­ns of the Founders, who empowered the people to select their own leaders but whose ultimate authority would be mediated and constraine­d by independen­t forces within a constituti­onal framework. As this superb book makes clear, we need both the liberal framework and the democracy, and bringing them back together is the greatest challenge of our time. The last 68 pages describe what we can do to pull ourselves back from the brink; they are familiar remedies — he didn’t invent them — but when you read those final pages, you should takes notes and start your to-do list. It’s important. Edwards was a member of Congress for 16 years. He later taught at Harvard and Princeton and is a vice president of the Aspen Institute. He is the author of “The Parties Versus the People: How to Turn Republican­s and Democrats into Americans.”

 ?? Jeff Swensen Getty Images ?? THEN-CANDIDATE Donald Trump revs up the crowd in the traditiona­l Democratic stronghold of Ambridge, Pa., in October 2016.
Jeff Swensen Getty Images THEN-CANDIDATE Donald Trump revs up the crowd in the traditiona­l Democratic stronghold of Ambridge, Pa., in October 2016.
 ?? Harvard University Press ??
Harvard University Press

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States