Democracy often takes two steps forward, one back
The bad news from the Economist’s annual Democracy Index is that things have never been so bad — not since the survey began 15 years ago.
Paragons of democracy have fallen victim to pandemic politics that impinge on civil liberties, or populist politics that infringe on basic freedoms.
Not just the United States but France — two countries that made history by resisting monarchical rule in the 1700s — have slipped into the realm of “flawed democracies,” according to the magazine’s metrics (Canada — that monarchical mainstay — is ranked fifth in the exclusive club of “full” democracies).
Many of the usual suspects tumbled further into the abyss of authoritarian regimes. Eastern European countries that showed early promise have lapsed into authoritarianism or secessionism, from Ukraine to Poland and Hungary. Asian countries that we counted on for steady progress, from the Philippines to Thailand, are in tumult.
It is the worst of democratic times. Except when it isn’t.
The good news is that democracy has never had it so good, all things considered. Democratic freedoms are under assault in some of these countries, but the mere fact that these norms are even in play — that elections are now being contested and injustices protested — is a mark of undeniable if not irreversible progress.
If we are today experiencing a “democratic recession,” the better analogy is to the business cycle that goes up and down. And back up again.
Put another way, the election cycle has always been cyclical — or more precisely, a prisoner of the pendulum. Voters lurch one way and then another, seduced by the promise of populism or enchanted by the allure of progressive social programs.
Democracy is never linear, for it is a learning curve and a growth curve — and the arc of history is increasingly electoral. Even the category of “flawed democracies” used by the Economist is a stretch, for no democracy is flawless or peerless.
Hence the aphorism from Winston Churchill, an inspirational if imperfect leader in his own right, endlessly quoted at our Ryerson Democracy Forums: “No one pretends that democracy is perfect or allwise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”
Democracy, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. It all depends on how you define it and perceive it.
The Economist treats the pandemic as a proxy for personal freedoms that underpin liberal democracies. Like many libertarians, the magazine frets about infringements on civil liberties as a slippery slope — as if, without absolute freedoms, we will fall into absolutism.
But COVID-19 is surely a grave public health emergency that demands decisive and sometimes drastic measures. Americans who couldn’t countenance mandatory masks are paying a high price in the aftermath; Swedes who were spared physical distancing are today distrustful of their government.
The Economist begrudges France for imposing nightly curfews that confine people to their homes, but Parisians were ready for drastic measures to fight the virus.
Quebecers, incidentally, have gone along with nightly curfews as helpful “shock therapy” (which didn’t stop the magazine’s editors from still giving Canada high marks).
The erosion of abortion rights in Poland is a setback for those of us who are pro-choice, but we see similar arbitrariness on abortion in countries ranging from the United States to Ireland. The mere fact we are even assessing fidelity to democracy in Poland is a testament to how far we have come since the fall of the Berlin Wall.
That we are lamenting this month’s coup in Myanmar is a reminder that, for a few fitful years, it was undergoing an experiment in democratization since the military first took power in the 1960s. Hopes that opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi would respect human rights after winning the 2015 election proved illusory, but protesters are now fearlessly demanding a restoration of democracy — a hopeful sign again.
The Arab Spring a decade ago brought forth the chill wind of military repression and the whirlwind of civil war. Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood overstepped, and the army overreacted; Libya, Syria and Yemen turned into failed states; Palestinians haven’t been able to vote on their leaders since 2005, while feuding Israeli politicians fight elections every year or so; Iraq, for all its upheaval at least has an elected parliament.
Democracy will not easily blossom when grafted onto untilled terrain, and every body politic marches to the beat of its own ballots.
Countries that lack stability or security (not to mention prosperity) tend to falter, for people are unlikely to coexist and coalesce amid personal peril and economic uncertainty.
Democracy is dynamic. By definition it is forever a work in progress — a perennial process, in fact, of endlessly cobbling together fleeting alliances and imperfect compromises among competing interests and rival factions and opposing views.
Democracy is not so much a means to an end as it is merely a means — full stop — for better or for worse. More than a steady march, it is typically two steps forward and one step back.
No index can capture that ebb and flow. Not in a good year, not even in a bad pandemic.
National Affairs
WASHINGTON — U.S. Capitol Police officials told congressional leaders the razor-wire topped fencing around the Capitol should remain in place for several more months as law enforcement continues to track threats against lawmakers, a person familiar with the matter told The Associated Press on Thursday.
The police officials suggested that the fence remain in place until September, in part because investigators are tracking continuing threats against lawmakers and the Capitol complex, the person said. The threats range in specificity and credibility, but they include online chatter about extremist groups potentially returning to Washington and to the Capitol in the coming weeks, the person told AP.
The police officials said the fence is needed as a physical barrier to prevent a potential repeat of the Jan. 6 insurrection when thousands of pro-Trump rioters stormed the Capitol as Congress was voting to certify Joe Biden’s presidential win, the person said. Five people, including a Capitol police officer, died as a result of the melee.
The person was not authorized to discuss the matter publicly and spoke on condition of anonymity.
But despite the recommendation, it is unclear how long the fence will remain surrounding the Capitol grounds with dozens of lawmakers growing tired of it and an increased push in Congress for it to come down.
More than 40 Republicans signed onto a letter two weeks ago calling on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to remove the fence and arrange for thousands of National Guard troops — sent to Washington to protect the Capitol complex after January’s riot — to go home.
The lawmakers said they were concerned about reports the fencing may be made permanent.
“It’s time for healing and it’s time for the removal of the fencing so the nation may move forward,” the letter read.
The acting Capitol Police chief has said “vast improvements” are needed to improve the physical security of the Capitol complex and that she would recommend permenant fencing to help better secure Congress.
“I can unequivocally say that vast improvements to the physical security infrastructure must be made to include permanent fencing, and the availability of ready, back-up forces in close proximity to the Capitol,” the acting chief, Yogananda Pittman, said in a statement late last month.
The Senate is scheduled to hold its first hearings next week to examine the Jan. 6 siege of the Capitol, calling in the former chief of Capitol Police and the former heads of security for the House and Senate, all three of whom resigned immediately after the attack.