The Opinion Pages | Op-Ed Columnist
The Governing Cancer of Our Time
We
live in a big, diverse society. There are essentially two ways to
maintain order and get things done in such a society — politics or some
form of dictatorship. Either through compromise or brute force. Our
founding fathers chose politics.
Politics
is an activity in which you recognize the simultaneous existence of
different groups, interests and opinions. You try to find some way to
balance or reconcile or compromise those interests, or at least a
majority of them. You follow a set of rules, enshrined in a constitution
or in custom, to help you reach these compromises in a way everybody
considers legitimate.
The
downside of politics is that people never really get everything they
want. It’s messy, limited and no issue is ever really settled. Politics
is a muddled activity in which people have to recognize restraints and
settle for less than they want. Disappointment is normal.
But
that’s sort of the beauty of politics, too. It involves an endless
conversation in which we learn about other people and see things from
their vantage point and try to balance their needs against our own.
Plus, it’s better than the alternative: rule by some authoritarian
tyrant who tries to govern by clobbering everyone in his way.
As Bernard Crick wrote in his book, “In Defence of Politics,” “Politics is a way of ruling divided societies without undue violence.”
Over
the past generation we have seen the rise of a group of people who are
against politics. These groups — best exemplified by the Tea Party but
not exclusive to the right — want to elect people who have no political
experience. They want “outsiders.” They delegitimize compromise and
deal-making. They’re willing to trample the customs and rules that give
legitimacy to legislative decision-making if it helps them gain power.
Ultimately,
they don’t recognize other people. They suffer from a form of political
narcissism, in which they don’t accept the legitimacy of other
interests and opinions. They don’t recognize restraints. They want total
victories for themselves and their doctrine.
This antipolitics tendency has had a wretched effect on our democracy. It has led to a series of overlapping downward spirals:
The
antipolitics people elect legislators who have no political skills or
experience. That incompetence leads to dysfunctional government, which
leads to more disgust with government, which leads to a demand for even
more outsiders.
The
antipolitics people don’t accept that politics is a limited activity.
They make soaring promises and raise ridiculous expectations. When those
expectations are not met, voters grow cynical and, disgusted, turn even
further in the direction of antipolitics.
The
antipolitics people refuse compromise and so block the legislative
process. The absence of accomplishment destroys public trust. The
decline in trust makes deal-making harder.
We’re
now at a point where the Senate says it won’t even hold hearings on a
presidential Supreme Court nominee, in clear defiance of custom and the
Constitution. We’re now at a point in which politicians live in fear if
they try to compromise and legislate. We’re now at a point in which
normal political conversation has broken down. People feel unheard,
which makes them shout even louder, which further destroys conversation.
And
in walks Donald Trump. People say that Trump is an unconventional
candidate and that he represents a break from politics as usual. That’s
not true. Trump is the culmination of the trends we have been seeing for
the last 30 years: the desire for outsiders; the bashing style of
rhetoric that makes conversation impossible; the decline of coherent
political parties; the declining importance of policy; the tendency to
fight cultural battles and identity wars through political means.
We
live in a big, diverse society. There are essentially two ways to
maintain order and get things done in such a society — politics or some
form of dictatorship. Either through compromise or brute force. Our
founding fathers chose politics.
Politics
is an activity in which you recognize the simultaneous existence of
different groups, interests and opinions. You try to find some way to
balance or reconcile or compromise those interests, or at least a
majority of them. You follow a set of rules, enshrined in a constitution
or in custom, to help you reach these compromises in a way everybody
considers legitimate.
The
downside of politics is that people never really get everything they
want. It’s messy, limited and no issue is ever really settled. Politics
is a muddled activity in which people have to recognize restraints and
settle for less than they want. Disappointment is normal.
But
that’s sort of the beauty of politics, too. It involves an endless
conversation in which we learn about other people and see things from
their vantage point and try to balance their needs against our own.
Plus, it’s better than the alternative: rule by some authoritarian
tyrant who tries to govern by clobbering everyone in his way.
As Bernard Crick wrote in his book, “In Defence of Politics,” “Politics is a way of ruling divided societies without undue violence.”
Over
the past generation we have seen the rise of a group of people who are
against politics. These groups — best exemplified by the Tea Party but
not exclusive to the right — want to elect people who have no political
experience. They want “outsiders.” They delegitimize compromise and
deal-making. They’re willing to trample the customs and rules that give
legitimacy to legislative decision-making if it helps them gain power.
Ultimately,
they don’t recognize other people. They suffer from a form of political
narcissism, in which they don’t accept the legitimacy of other
interests and opinions. They don’t recognize restraints. They want total
victories for themselves and their doctrine.
This antipolitics tendency has had a wretched effect on our democracy. It has led to a series of overlapping downward spirals:
The
antipolitics people elect legislators who have no political skills or
experience. That incompetence leads to dysfunctional government, which
leads to more disgust with government, which leads to a demand for even
more outsiders.
The
antipolitics people don’t accept that politics is a limited activity.
They make soaring promises and raise ridiculous expectations. When those
expectations are not met, voters grow cynical and, disgusted, turn even
further in the direction of antipolitics.
The
antipolitics people refuse compromise and so block the legislative
process. The absence of accomplishment destroys public trust. The
decline in trust makes deal-making harder.
We’re
now at a point where the Senate says it won’t even hold hearings on a
presidential Supreme Court nominee, in clear defiance of custom and the
Constitution. We’re now at a point in which politicians live in fear if
they try to compromise and legislate. We’re now at a point in which
normal political conversation has broken down. People feel unheard,
which makes them shout even louder, which further destroys conversation.
And
in walks Donald Trump. People say that Trump is an unconventional
candidate and that he represents a break from politics as usual. That’s
not true. Trump is the culmination of the trends we have been seeing for
the last 30 years: the desire for outsiders; the bashing style of
rhetoric that makes conversation impossible; the decline of coherent
political parties; the declining importance of policy; the tendency to
fight cultural battles and identity wars through political means.
Trump
represents the path the founders rejected. There is a hint of violence
undergirding his campaign. There is always a whiff, and sometimes more
than a whiff, of “I’d like to punch him in the face.”
I printed out a Times list
of the insults Trump has hurled on Twitter. The list took up 33 pages.
Trump’s style is bashing and pummeling. Everyone who opposes or
disagrees with him is an idiot, a moron or a loser. The implied promise
of his campaign is that he will come to Washington and bully his way
through.
Trump’s
supporters aren’t looking for a political process to address their
needs. They are looking for a superhero. As the political scientist Matthew MacWilliams found,
the one trait that best predicts whether you’re a Trump supporter is
how high you score on tests that measure authoritarianism.
This
isn’t just an American phenomenon. Politics is in retreat and
authoritarianism is on the rise worldwide. The answer to Trump is
politics. It’s acknowledging other people exist. It’s taking pleasure in
that difference and hammering out workable arrangements. As Harold
Laski put it, “We shall make the basis of our state consent to
disagreement. Therein shall we ensure its deepest harmony.---{-=@
HICKOK