Prepared for Democracy on the Anniversary of January 6th?

In Frank Capra’s Meet John Doe (1941) Gary Cooper plays a homeless man who’s used by corrupt forces to control a budding populist movement.

Capra kept the plot secret until the film's release for fear of American fascists utilizing it for propaganda purposes, and filmed five different endings.

Liz Cheney has spent years learning how the Federal Government works.*
That’s why I take it seriously when Cheney says, in her book Oath and Honor, that the U.S. is “on the precipice of losing” its’ system of government because “a free society that abandons the truth—that abandons the rule of law—cannot remain free.”

On the other hand, most U.S. citizens are fairly ignorant on how Government runs.
Despite this, they seem to have great faith in the overall stability of the checks and balances system.
We seem to believe that the political system will continue ( as if on autopilot), without everyone needing to vote. 

As Rachel Maddow reveals in Prequel: An American Fight Against Fascism, the late 1930’s was also a time when the U.S. political system was tested.
During that period, admired hero and aviator Charles Lindbergh (1902-1974), said that Americans should “guard their heritage” from the “Mongol and Persian and Moor, before we become engulfed in a limitless foreign sea.”
Popular Catholic radio broadcaster, Father Charles Coughlin (1891-1979), called for a General Franco-style armed revolt against “invaders of our spiritual and national rights.”
(Tens of millions listened to his sermons, and some set up arsenals!)

Some artists, and thinkers, saw the danger in the 1930’s.
Little-known British author Katharine Burdekin wrote Swastika Night (1937).
This is an alternative history science fiction story in which Adolf Hitler, and the Nazis, won.
(It’s spooky that this work was written just as WWII was beginning!)
In this prescient novel, a male character muses about Democracy (italics and bold face mine):

In a democracy no man of character is willing to give up his right of private judgment. . . there is also the large mass of weaker men, who must be told always what to do . . . I still do not see how democracy can be made to last long enough to develop character in a sufficient number of people. . . And there is another thing. Has a democracy ever started in a community, a nation, where the men all really considered themselves equal, no one fundamentally and unalterably superior to any other?

In 1940, First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt expressed similar (if more optimistic) thoughts in her article “The Moral Basis of Democracy” (italics and bold face mine):

If human beings can be changed to fit a Nazi or Fascist pattern or a Communist pattern, certainly we should not lose heart at the thought of changing human nature to fit a Democratic way of life. . . Real Democracy cannot be stable and it cannot go forward to its fullest development and growth if this type of individual responsibility does not exist, not only in the leaders but in the people as a whole.

Katharine Burdekin and Eleanor Roosevelt reached similar conclusions—that a Democracy was only possible if everyone (people of whatever social class and skin tone) was equal, and if everyone was willing to compromise.
(The other choice is first chaos, and then Authoritarianism.)

Italian poster for 1956’s Alexander the Great, in which Richard Burton played Alexander—the Macedonian ruler who conquered all the Greek tribes and most of western Asia.

Alexander inherited power over Macedonia from his father Philip (Fredric March).

Maintaining a Democracy isn’t easy.

It’s not even natural.
For a very long time, “might makes right” seemed to be the rule, and people are mainly concerned about their own needs.
Eventually, humankind developed “the Divine Right of Kings,” and “royal blood,” myths (so sons could succeed fathers).
(This made the passing down of power slightly less contentious.)

Servilius Casca (Edmund O’Brien) struck the first blow against Julius Caesar (Louis Calhern) in 1953’s Julius Caesar.

(Roman senators feared that Julius Caesar would make himself monarch of Rome, but actually, his fall led to a string of emperors.)

Beginning in the 6th century BC, the Greeks, and later the Romans, experimented with people ruling themselves.

In the Greek city-state of Athens, however, slaves and women were excluded from voting.
In Roman society—during the periods when people were allowed to vote—only aristocratic men could vote.
Roman society still maintained the fiction that rule was “with the consent of the governed.”

Europe began to flirt with democratic concepts in the late 1600s.
In 1689, the British Parliament established a Bill of Rights (used as a model for the U.S. 1789 Bill of Rights).

Workers riot in the 1927 science-fiction classic Metropolis.

Critics have called the politics of the film “incoherent”, since both communists and fascists believe that the movie validates their respective philosophies.

One hundred years later, in 1789, the French people rose up against aristocratic rule.
Ten years later Napoleon Bonaparte gained control of France, however, and he eventually crowned himself Emperor.
Today, the British don’t vote directly for their Prime Minister.
Presidents of France are elected by voters—usually, in a two-round system—because there are several political parties.

The U.S. was the first “modern” experiment in Democracy.
However, the U.S. was handicapped with confusion over who was in charge.
In a perfect world, the Declaration of Independence should have read “all humankind is created equal.”
Instead, Black enslaved people, Native Americans, and women were all left out.
Were some Founders really thinking “white Anglo-Saxon Protestant wealthy men,” when they proclaimed “all men are created equal?”
Have Americans always lived in a Democracy in which one group is more equal than others?

Two factors have helped to keep Democracy stable: the U.S. had a large middle class, plus plenty of room to “spread out.”
(Was it “from sea to shining sea,” and Manifest Destiny, that kept Democracy alive?)
However, the size, and prosperity, of the middle class has shrunk since the 1970s.
Today, 66.6% of the total wealth in the U.S. is owned by 10% of the earners and the lowest 50% of earners only hold 2.6% of the total wealth.
(The balance tilts further every year.)

Why are schools so relentless positive about the strength of American “checks and balances” system?
Why are the times—when the rules were bent by people in high places—discussed in academia, but not in textbooks?
We should know more about the occasions when mistakes were made, so we can prevent errors in the future.

There are many examples when “the system” failed.
In the little-discussed 1876 election, Democrat Samuel J. Tilden won the popular vote, and would also have won the electoral college vote.
However, Republican Rutherford B. Hayes still became the nation’s 19th president, in a “smoke-filled room,” allowing both parties to end Reconstruction!
In Prequel, Rachel Maddow reveals how powerful Senator Burton K. Wheeler (1882-1975) engineered the firings of two Department of Justice employees, so as not to further publicize his pro-fascist deeds.

Unless we own up to the fragility of our system, we may lose it altogether.
It seems that our schools, textbooks, religions and parents haven’t done an adequate job of building character in the American voter, or changing human nature so it fits a Democratic (rather than an Authoritarian) model.
Why are so few of us prepared for living in a Democratic system?
Why do so few people vote?

*Liz Cheney represented Wyoming in the U.S. House from 2017-23. Before that, she was Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, and worked for the U.S. Agency for International Development. In Oath and Honor, Cheney explains how her parents taught her American history, and about being a citizen.

Gimmie, Gimmie, Gimmie—A Story of Entitlement

Alexander Hamilton (Derryl Yeager) and James Madison (Craig Wasson) in a scene from 1989’s A More Perfect Union: America becomes a Nation.

Article 1, Section 2, of the Constitution, stated which people would be counted to determine the number of Representatives (for each state) in the House, and for taxation purposes.
This was an important number because it gave states power within the Federal Government.
Southern states, with large slave populations, wanted extra power.
However, they didn’t want slaves to be thought of as more than chattel.
As a result, the “Three-Fifths Compromise” was devised in 1787.

The counted people were free (white) men, women, and children, including “those bound to service for a term of years.”
Thus, indentured (white) servants were considered “free.”
(Indentured servitude ended for the most part in 1864, but it wasn’t abolished until 1917.)

The people to be excluded were “Indians not taxed” (Native Americans living in tribal territories) and “three-fifths of all other persons.”
“All other persons” meant slaves.
Thus, a few free Black people were counted as people; but enslaved people were counted as three-fifths of one person, for House Representation and tax purposes.

The 14th Amendment repealed the Three-Fifths Compromise in 1868, but Native Americans living in tribal territories were still excluded from representation.
Twenty years later, the Dawes Act allowed citizenship to those Native Americans who owned land.
However, all Native Americans weren’t declared citizens until 1924.
According to Jefferson and the Indians, by Anthony F. C. Wallace, the Cherokees asked for citizenship as early as 1808.

Newton Knight (Matthew McConnaughey) shows his common-law wife Rachel (Gugu Mbatha-Raw) how to shoot in Free State of Jones.

Stephen Budiansky’s The Bloody Shirt: Terror After the Civil War, quotes an address by the Provisional Governor Benjamin F. Perry to the South Carolina constitutional convention in 1865—the early days of Reconstruction.
Perry proclaimed that “to be no longer a slave in no way made the Negro a citizen,” and “this is a white man’s government, intended for white men only. . . To speak of extending political equality to the Negro was nothing but folly and madness.”

Although Perry was mandated by President Johnson to end slavery in his state, he was making sure that the convention of “gentlemen” knew that only they were entitled to full political equality.
South Carolina remained a “white man’s government” for decades after 1865, because Southern men thought it “madness” to elevate Blacks “to the dignity of the white man.”

Panel from a comic book, approved by George Wallace, used to promote segregation in Alabama during his 1960 campaign for Governor.

In George Wallace’s 1963 inaugural address (as governor of Alabama), Wallace declared that “in the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth” he would protect “separate racial stations” with “segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever.”
(The libraries and schools for Black Alabama children would NOT be as well provided for as those for white children.
However, there would be libraries and schools of some mean sort.)
All over this country, there are still big differences between schools and libraries in exclusively Black neighborhoods versus those in White neighborhoods.

Ernest Burkhart and Mollie Kyle (Leonardo DiCaprio and Lily Gladstone) in Martin Scorsese’s Killers of the Flower Moon.

The film Killers of the Flower Moon (based on the David Grann book) is scheduled to be released on October 20th.
It’s about members of the Osage tribe being murdered for oil money.
I’ve read that David Grann outlines the back story.
The Osage tribes, and the U.S., made a treaty in 1808 in which they were to be protected on a portion of their own land.
A few years later, the Government broke its’ word and moved them to Kansas.
After Kansas became popular with white settlers, the Osage were moved (once more) to Oklahoma, where oil was found, making them wealthy.
The local white power structure, of the 1920s, felt that only they were entitled to the wealth of the land. Therefore, many people were murdered.

Although immigrants were categorized as “exotic novelties” down to “wretched refuse (of your teaming shore),” being an immigrant didn’t stand in the way of gaining wealth.
Between 1815-1860, the three richest men in the U.S.—Frenchman Stephen Girard, German-born John Jacob Astor, and Irishman Alexander Turney Stewart—were all immigrants.
Immigrants are still among the wealthiest people: Chinese-born Eric Yuan, South African-born Elon Musk, and Nigerian-born Tope Awotona, among others.
According to recent study,* immigrants are 80% more likely to found companies, than those born in the U.S.
(Perhaps, the main reason immigrants start new companies is because it’s impossible to get ahead working for others.)

Gordon Gekko (Michael Douglas) proclaiming “Greed, for lack of a better word, is good,” in 1987’s Wall Street.

For generations, there was more economic disparity between rich and poor in Europe, than in the U.S.
However, the balance shifted dramatically around 1980.
Wealth and Democracy: A Political History of the American Rich, by Kevin Phillips, analyzes how the superrich have harvested privileges—at the expense of the lower and middle classes—despite the U.S. being a democratic society.
Wealth and Democracy was written twenty years ago.
In 2002, CEOs made 145 times as much as a typical worker.
By 2022, CEOs made 344 times as much as a typical worker.
Now, the average Fortune 500 CEO salary is $15.9 million a year, while the average worker salary is $61,900 a year.

When people speak up for unions, parity, and a safety net, they’re dismissed as communists.
However, cut-throat Darwinian capitalism was never a good fit with democracy.
It dismisses the worker as just a cog, and raises up the “job-creators” above all others.
(Consumers are the true job-creators.)
This isn’t a battle between capitalism and communism; it’s a battle of entitlement. 

Eleanor Roosevelt, First Lady of the United States, 1933-1945. 

Former First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt died in November of 1962.
In one of her last essays “The Social Revolution,” published in Tomorrow is Now, she discusses issues that are still crucial today: 

It is this minority of strident and prejudiced people, with their unwillingness to accept race equality—at whatever cost—who provide the Communists with most of their ammunition against the democratic system, who are loudest in their expression of hatred for Communism. . .this recurring matter of labeling “Communist” anyone who does not agree with you is essentially an act of dishonesty and it should be nailed every time for what it is.

*”Immigration and Entrepreneurship in the United States,” Azoulay, Jones, Kim, and Miranda, Vol. 4, No.1, March 2022, American Economic Review: Insights.

Who’s Drinking the Flavor-Aid?

Jim Jones [Powers Boothe] in 1980’s Guyana Tragedy: The Story of Jim Jones.

This historical event is where the phrase “drinking the Kool-Aid” originated. Actually, Jones gave his flock generic Flavor-Aid.

Several years ago, when I worked for a very large company, the company was going through yet another “reorg.”
I remember a meeting in which a Senior Vice President faced over 100 members of her division.
She enumerated the many adjustments we were about to go through, and (making it clear that she disagreed with the changes), commented that we all had to “drink the Kool-Aid.”*
In other words, we all had to pretend that the reorganization was a fine idea, and “go along,” without complaint.

Superman (George Reeves) in Adventures of Superman, which aired 1952-58.
The voiceover ended with the tagline “Truth, justice, and the American way.”
(In 2021, DC Comics updated the Superman tagline to “Truth, justice, and a better tomorrow.”)

In trying to figure out this period of political polarization, I’ve decided that we’ve been drinking different flavors of Kool-Aid.
I had been drinking the fantasy that Democrats and Republicans were basically similar, we were all in a melting pot, and most citizens believed in my family’s interpretation of the slogan associated with Superman: “Truth, justice, and the American way.”
When Donald Trump was elected President via the Electoral College—while losing the popular vote—I finally realized that I’d been drinking some serious Kool-Aid.

I had completely missed that some people had been traumatized by having President Obama as President for eight years, couldn’t conceive of a woman as their President, and/or cared deeply for a candidate who I perceived as a conman.
I hadn’t paid much attention to Trump (because I had a bad opinion of him after living in New York City in the 1980’s and 1990’s).
However, many Americans had listened to him, and had responded powerfully to his message.

Scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail, with Peasant 2 (Michael Palin) screaming “Help, help. I’m being repressed,” as he’s being strangled by King Arthur (Graham Chapman).

Some Trump supporters think that they are being supplanted by people of color and immigrants.
They also tend to interpret the “American way of life” in a way I had never considered.
In this world view: White men should be in power, “outgroups” (like LGBT and “non-white” people) should accept a lower status, and White Anglo-Saxon Protestant societal values should be placed on a pedestal.
(It’s true some Catholics, Hispanics and Southern Italians are allied with MAGA, but their own cultures are thereby repressed.)

Furthermore, most Trump supporters are extremely cynical about Government.
They think it’s obvious that elections are stolen, the Federal government is corrupt, and politicians steal.
When I hear MAGA people being interviewed, it seems that their only real goal is to elect politicians who will cut taxes, and stop the tide of “outgroups taking over society.”

In the book The Truth About Lies: The Illusion of Honesty and the Evolution of Lies, by Aja Raden, Raden quotes a 2002 study by Colleen Seifert, a psychology professor at the University of Michigan, who specializes in complex human cognition.
According to Seifert: “when people are presented with evidence that the information they’ve been exposed to over and over is factually untrue, the attempts to refute it further entrench their belief.”
[Emphasis mine.]
Once someone is convinced of something, and it feels “like truth” to them, convincing them otherwise is close to impossible.

The U.S. seems stuck in a place in which about 60% (?) acknowledge that an unfit criminal held the nation’s highest office for four years, and another 40% (?) seem to believe that he did a good job and it would be fine if he were President again.
Making the situation worse, only half (or less) of U.S. citizens can be persuaded to vote, and it’s unclear which side the non-voters are on.

Eleanor Roosevelt (Gillian Anderson) in The First Lady—the 2022 TV series.

In 1940, Eleanor Roosevelt (1884-1962), then First Lady of the U.S., wrote an essay entitled “The Moral Basis of Democracy,” saying:

We are in truth the melting pot of the earth. Our solidarity and unity can never be a geographical unity or a racial unity. It must be a unity growing out of a common idea and a devotion to that idea.

It seems that few of us are devoted to the ideal of Democracy. She goes on to say:

Moreover, no one can honestly claim that either the Indians or the Negroes of this country are free. [Roosevelt used the accepted terminology of the times.] . . . Few members of the older generation have even attempted to make themselves the kind of people who are truly worthy of the power which is vested in the individual in a Democracy. We must fulfill our duties as citizens, see that our nation is truly represented by its government, see that the government is responsive to the will and desires of the people. . . We must maintain a standard of living which makes it possible for the people really to want justice for all, rather than harbor a secret hope for privileges because they cannot hope for justice.

Do Americans still hope for Justice?
About a year before she wrote this essay, Mrs. Roosevelt wrote another essay called “Keepers of Democracy,” which appeared in the Virginia Quarterly Review (Winter, 1939).
She says:

There is a growing wave in this country of fear, and of intolerance which stems from fear. . . when we allow one group of people to look down upon another, then we may for a short time bring hardship on some particular group of people, but the real hardship and the real wrong is done to democracy and to our nation as a whole. We are then breeding people who cannot live under a democratic form of government but must be controlled by force.

Have we bred people who cannot live under Democracy?
How many voters no longer hope for justice?
Is the simple difference between the two sides that some are willing to endure an authoritarian government (as long as they are accepted into the group that is “on top”), while others want to live equally with others and make the bargains necessary to live in a Democracy?

*In case anyone is too young to know where the phrase “drinking the Kool-Aid” originated, it comes from the story of Jim Jones—a cult leader who died in 1978, with around 900 followers (at least 200 of them children). According to Wikipedia, Jones asked his group to ingest grape-flavored Flavor-Aid (misidentified as Kool-Aid) plus cyanide, as an act of “revolutionary suicide.”