March 31, 2023
At the risk of sounding a bit like Garrison Keillor about the week just past in Lake Wobegon, it has been another busy week both at home and away.
It was not my intention to begin this issue with Donald Trump, but as is often the case, he is impossible to ignore. We do not know any of the details, but at a minimum he appears to face indictment for altering documents to hide the fact that he ordered hush money to be sent to Stormy Daniels. There could well be more. Again, I know that no one is above the law, but such crimes I would argue are not nearly as significant as the attempts on his part to undermine American democracy. This all needs to be seen through a political as well as legal lens.
Indeed, this indictment will lead many (and not just those already in his corner) to believe what has taken place is politically not legally motivated. It has a good chance of strengthening Trump’s bid to get the Republican nomination as it will make it difficult for anyone to attack him on the issues lest they seem to be siding with a progressive DA. Abroad, it may strengthen respect for American democracy by demonstrating that the rich and powerful are not above the law, but even this boost may be short-lived if things in this country come to resemble a circus more than anything serious.
Otherwise here at home, it was sad, frustrating, and anger-inducing to see yet another week dominated by gun violence. This manifestation of American exceptionalism is one we could all do without. It’s not just the prevalence of guns in this society but the matter of who can buy them and what is available for sale. The only way this will change is when enough voters make placing limits on access to highly (and inappropriately) capable guns a priority so that politicians afraid to take on the NRA and the extremists who oppose just about any limits will pay a price for their irresponsibility.
Near absolute opposition to reasonable constraints is a tragic example of how focusing only on one set of rights while ignoring others (in this case the right to be safe) is simply wrong. Current policy is also an example about how ignoring obligations (in this case to be open to compromise) is likewise wrong, as the right to be safe is no less of a right than gun ownership. Many politicians motivated by self-preservation more than anything else would, however, be responsive to political pressure if it were to materialize. So it is up to the vast majority of citizens who in polls claim they favor reasonable limits on guns to become politically active on behalf of their stated preference.
Speaking of polls, a second item I want to discuss is a poll just conducted by the Wall Street Journal and the University of Chicago’s NORC. It highlights the connection between economic difficulties and outlook. Pessimism is growing in this country, something that is dangerous for any democracy as it brings with it the potential that citizens will opt for illiberal alternatives in the hope they can deliver where democracy cannot. What made this even more worrying was comparing the results to a similar poll conducted some 25 years ago.
What we see is a sharp decline in patriotism, religion, a desire to have children, and community involvement. Again, we fail to correct what is wrong with our democracy at our individual and collective peril. My own recipe for what to do to arrest these trends constitutes the central theme of my recent book, The Bill of Obligations: The Ten Habits of Good Citizens.
One final Home item, which is the public letter written by Professor Jenny Martinez, the Dean of the Stanford Law School. She penned the letter in the wake of the uncivil and just plain outrageous behavior of a number of law school students as well as an associate dean, behavior that made it impossible for a federal judge to speak at a Federalist Society event on campus. The letter spells out the norms and rules that ought to govern political and intellectual life at any college or university. She usefully explains that “protests are in some instances protected by the First Amendment, but that the First Amendment does not give protesters a heckler’s veto,” i.e., the ability to shout down others so they cannot be heard. Our campuses ought to be a safe space for disagreement, not intolerant, illiberal venues where only a narrow take on controversial issues can be voiced.
As for Away, the big story has been Israel. At one level what is happening there is another example of democratic backsliding. In this case, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, someone I would argue appears more interested in his own legal and political future than the well-being of his country, moved to increase the ability of the government to appoint judges and to make it possible for the court’s rulings to be overturned by a simple majority in Israel’s legislature, the Knesset. Efforts to implement the proposal triggered massive, unprecedented protests, which mounted in the wake of Netanyahu’s dismissal of his minister of defense who opposed the judicial overhaul. In the end, the prime minister faced a choice between bringing down his government by dropping his proposals or rupturing the society by going ahead. He chose to avoid this choice by postponing any decision. We will see what happens after the Passover holiday ends around mid-April.
I doubt that Netanyahu can sell a compromise on the judicial reform issue to both his opponents and to his government. It may well be impossible for him to square the circle as is, although I don’t rule out that he would compromise on the judicial issue but keep his government intact all the same by changing policy on some other matter, for example by giving the green light to more settlements.
But whatever happens, what we are seeing in Israel is something larger than a constitutional clash in a country that doesn’t have a constitution. It is a clash over nothing less than the country’s future, the balance between secular and religious communities, the scope of settlements, and relations with Palestinians. As with a good many other democracies, including this one, Israel is deeply divided. What makes it all so significant is that Israel lives in a dangerous neighborhood, one with a potential Iranian nuclear threat, hostile militias on its borders, and always vulnerable peace accords. What is more, Israel’s relationship with this country, its principal supporter, has long been predicated on values as much as strategic alignment. The problem is that strategic agreement has been fading in recent years owing to differences over how to deal with the Palestinian issue, Ukraine, and Iran. If Israel is seen as an illiberal democracy, then the question arises as to what basis exists for continued U.S. financial, military, and diplomatic support.
Finally, there is this week’s Democracy Summit, the second held by the Biden administration. It is a singularly bad idea. To begin with, it is not clear just what a democracy is and who qualifies, a reality that complicates the invite list. More important, the United States needs to rally governments and not just democratic ones behind policies ranging from opposing Russian aggression to balancing China, fighting climate change, and resisting terrorism. And then there is the awkward reality that American democracy these days is all too often something other than a shining city on a hill. The best way we can promote democracy is by demonstrating that this one delivers political, economic, and social benefits to its citizens. Unfortunately, on issues ranging from guns to health and from inflation to political gridlock, we are failing to do that, a reality no amount of democracy summits can hope to compete with.
Last but hopefully not least, some links to click on. And feel free to share Home & Away with your friends and foes alike.
In the news
Monday, March 27: CNN The Situation Room
Tuesday, March 28: "Leadership Matters" with Alan Fleischmann
Thursday, March 30: Constitution Center-America's Town Hall Virtual Session "Civic Virtue and Citizenship"