The Future of American Democracy

I think I've always known there was what I unfairly call a lunatic fringe of our society. That's true with any society of creatures, human and animal. There are always those on the edges who have rejected the consensus of the majority in favor of some outlandish theory of life, lifestyle, religious myths, politics, or society. These are the people who, if there are 100 people in a gathering that all agree on A, this 2% - perhaps even 5% will reject the collective wisdom of the masses and go off on a tangent, B, that only they seem to understand. That number now appears to be over fifty percent.

From the first days of what would become the United States of America, we had outliers who didn't want to go along with the majority. Hell, for all I know, Daniel Boone was just such a character and would have voted for Trump. This is a fun read about old Dan: https://tinyurl.com/2s4fukny

We called them pioneers and explorers. They were often people who didn't like what society wanted and took off into the wilderness to create a society to their liking. There is no longer a wilderness, except perhaps in the minds of some of these folks, so they have concluded if they can't leave - there's nowhere left to go - they will stay put and try to take over power and force society to be what they want it to by. When Trump came along, unquestionably the king of the nonsensical, the preposterous, a living, breathing tyrant, they had their champion.

Reading the theories and analyses of the 2024 election, it seems that enough men, white, Black, and Latino, young, and even some women abandoned the notion of e pluribus unum, "out of many, one,” and chose to look out for themselves, as in, "hurray for me and fuck everyone else.”

If I were to believe what I read, their motivation was primarily around two issues: jobs and the economy. I sense that by "economy,” which is a large and complicated machine, they really mean the cost of living wherever they live. It's the small "e" personal economy, not the big "E" national economy.

Let's look at a couple of facts from vox.com's March 2024 analysis of presidential performance with some of my minor edits for brevity and readability:

"Trump arrived in office when the economy was already pretty strong. He was “just riding on the coattails of a 10-year-long economic recovery,” said Alí R. Bustamante, deputy director of worker power and economic security at Roosevelt Forward, the progressive political arm of the Roosevelt Institute."

"Some of Trump’s signature economic policies have also been found to have had little to no measurable effect on the economy — and a few might have even hurt. Multiple studies have shown that the Trump tariffs at best had a neutral effect on the economy and at worst cost America hundreds of thousands of jobs and higher prices for consumers."

"Biden faced the immediate task of heading off a recession upon assuming office as the country started to bounce back from the pandemic. The US recovered from the pandemic economic slump, but there is evidence that Biden's policies, including the stimulus checks he issued, contributed to an inflationary spiral."

"The US did, however, curb inflation faster than other economically developed countries, while also maintaining much lower levels of unemployment and higher wage growth."

"Americans’ wages are now growing faster than inflation, which should relieve some of the pressure of higher prices.”
"The problem for Biden is that the memory of peak inflation is still fresh, and not everyone has experienced wage growth equally."

That last conclusion about memory brings me to the other part of my argument. I mentioned bandwidth. Suppose you are unfamiliar with that term, or you may have heard it but need help understanding its meaning. In that case, it means "the capacity for data transfer of an electronic communications system.”

When I refer to bandwidth in the context of voter comprehension of the complexities of governing a nation of 330 million people, it refers to "the emotional or mental capacity necessary to do or consider extensive and complex issues."

This is not a put-down or condemnation of anyone. We all have varying analytical skills and comprehension abilities. People like Einstein, Vera Rubin, Hawking, and deGrasse Tyson, talk about shit like dark matter and string theories. While I listen to them with fascination, I'm lucky to comprehend twenty percent of what they're talking about, and that's probably bragging.

An added problem is that most of us have full lives with family, work, and a host of issues that occupy our minds. If that is the case, we should be relying on qualified and reputable sources to help guide us through the thorny business of governance.

I listen, I pay attention, and I try to understand. I fear that too many voters in this election chose one or two hot-button topics and went with any candidate who promised them a chicken in any pot, regardless of how hard or practically impossible that may be to pull off. I can only conclude they voted selfishly instead of selflessly.

Another point I would like to make is that if you are living in small town, Nebraska, Iowa, Kentucky, or anywhere else in this country, and your economy sucks, look at the big picture for the nation as I just did. If the overall picture is positive and your town is on its ass, that is a problem with local politics, city, county, and state. The federal government makes policies at the federal level.

Yes, the feds try to make those decisions in a way that clears a path for the maximum number of folks to benefit at local levels, but they don't control the decision of the mayor and city council in Ding Dong, North Dakota, or anywhere else.

If you like analogies like I do, think about the freeways in our country. The feds have high-level guidelines for the interstate and other highways, but speed limits, safety, and enforcement happen locally. If your highways are a mess, it's not the fault of the sitting president; it's your local politicians.

If the overall jobs are up across the country, and your small town or county is struggling, the problem is not at the federal level, its with your local politicians and the decisions they are making to attract and retain jobs in your region.

In summary, the fact that over fifty percent of the people who voted chose a felon, sex offender, sexist, racist, and huckster to be the next president, whatever their justification might be, troubles me greatly. I fear we have opened the door to chaos in our government. Who's next in the White House? A prison parolee? A known drug trafficker?

Maybe we need to bring Latin back into the education system so people know what e pluribus unum means. I know politics has always been a dirty business, but I think it just sank out of sight in the greed and callousness of a majority of voters. I hope I'm wrong, and at my age, I hope to be around long enough to be proven wrong, but I doubt it.