Richard Hofstadter: Champion of the Values of Irony and Balance- But Relentless Passion is Often Essential to Make Breakthrough Progress

 

David S. Brown’s book, Richard Hofstadter, An Intellectual Biography reminded me why I so appreciated Hofstadter’s writings and political beliefs in my younger days.  He takes a balanced and appropriately ironic view to both the Left and Right when they plant themselves in ideological certainties, which he dismisses.  He found himself “oppositional” and “skeptical” by nature throughout his career, from different vantage points in terms of emphasis, including being no fan of Roosevelt, even though he agreed with many of his policies’ and, of course, being bitterly opposed to McCarthy and the far Right.

 

He would be dismayed by what exists today, a too-far-left progressive wing of the Democratic Party and an entrenched right wing of the Republican Party fueled and caricatured by Trump himself, with an eroding middle in the values he most appreciated:  “Intellectual autonomy, scientific enquiry, individual freedom, and cultural latitude,” or, in my words, open-minded consideration of different cultural views. 

 

Late in his career, probably close to his death in 1970, Hofstadter wrote presciently in terms of our current moment:  “The United States began with the heritage of slavery and with White Anglo-Saxon Protestant domination…”  “The upsurge of new immigrants, the Catholics and now finally the Negroes has made our 20^th century history into a story of ethnic wars of various kinds, war incidental to transforming the old America into a multi-ethnic, multi-religious urban society.” 

 

The arc of Hofstadter’s career in thinking was in effect a pilgrimage from the Left to the liberalist center.

 

Late in his career, Hofstadter raised the issue of violence.  He, together with a number of other historians, contributed original essays to the New York Times magazine on the topic, “Is America by Nature a Violent Society?”  Hofstadter’s brief piece, produced only days after the murder of Dr. Martin Luther King, saw more darkness than light.  He lashed out at the “feebleness of our efforts at gun control” and the ease with which “any zealot, any maniac, could purchase a firearm.”  Disturbed by the New Left posturing, and concerned with the fate of pluralism and a political system crippled by sharp ideological divisions, Hofstadter saw little promise for a peaceful society.  Quoting from D.H. Lawrence, he concluded that, “The sacred rites of American manhood” to arm oneself have led to a deeper and more ominous truth—“The essential American soul is hard, isolate, stoic and a killer.”  This is going too far.  Yet, 54 years later, sadly and truthfully these words ring with more truth than we wish, as we witness the even greater prevalence of guns, outbreak of mass shootings, and the removal by the Supreme Court of the state’s right to control the concealed carrying of handguns.

 

Irony permeated Hofstadter’s writing and thinking.  He used irony to shed light on the confusing and often absurd episodes of the past.  This struck many scholars as a strategy of careful detachment or evasion—imposing an artificial sense of complexity as a means of avoiding or rationalizing away conflict.  That’s not how he intended, nor do I; it’s to show the reality of conflict and, yes, the absurdity of unintended consequences which pursuit of ideals often produces.

 

Hofstadter lamented unreflecting, all-knowing and close-minded pronouncements on both the Left and Right.  He saw the irony in student protests on campus at a time when they had more freedom and more rights than ever before.

And yet, knowing where to draw the line on this is difficult.  For if it were not for what Hofstadter probably would have called intemperate protests, progressive social change of which he approves would not have taken place, certainly not on the timing that it did.  That’s true when it comes to women’s suffrage, the abolition of slavery, the approval of fair labor and childcare policies, securing the right to vote.  Progress, like it or not, will often depend, if not always, especially when it comes to the big changes on what those in the middle (and I am often there) would describe as intemperate.

President Biden's and the Nation's Lost Opportunity--Restoring the "Soul of America"

Whatever the future brings, we must never forget the eternal debt we owe President Biden. He enabled our country, as only he at the time could have, to avoid the damage and scourge which another four years of Donald Trump would have inflicted on our Nation and the world. And with the confidence foreign leaders had in him,  President Biden has brought together an allied front to thwart Russia's invasion of Ukraine as few if any other leader could have done. And there is much more he will be recognized for in the retrospect of history, including the bi-partisan infrastructure bill which has been too little celebrated and expanded health care. 

But it could have been so much more!

Biden campaigned under the banner of  restoring the "Soul of America". There was never any doubt he meant it; that he intended to do it. Nor was there any doubt how urgent is was to do just that. Yet that vision of restoring a unified view of what we aspire to as a Nation is more distant today than perhaps any time in my 80+ year life. And that makes me very sad. 

I don't know if was possible to have made progress against that vision. It was certainly an uphill battle from the start, given the Republican election deniers, led by Trump himself,  asserting in the face of all the facts that Trump should be President. And, equally, given those countless Republicans who knew better, like Rob Portman of Ohio and so many others, who failed to step up publicly, emphatically and repeatedly to assert the truth. 

Still, recognizing all those realities and I could cite many more, I don't believe President Biden gave it his best shot. I attribute this to two things.

1. He moved forward immediately with an agenda which was too varied and revolutionary; an agenda which failed to recognize the very slim Democratic majorities in Congress; an agenda which was too beholden to the interests of the Left wing of the Democratic party and which did not benefit from and reflect sufficient consultation with the middle of the Republican party. Again, I am not sure such consultation would have resulted in a better outcome. But I am convinced it should have been tried. 

I argued from the start that Biden should have appointed some Republicans to the Cabinet and Senior Adviser positions, as Lincoln did in 1860 and as Churchill did in 1940 and as FDR did as well. I argued from the start that Biden should have started his Administration on Day 1, by bringing the Congressional leaders together in the Oval Office to start to define the key issues (economy, immigration, Covid, health care, etc) that needed to be tackled and how he hoped they would work together to make progress to resolve them.

2. He has failed to address the Nation as OUR PRESIDENT, not just as the head of a political party or strong advocate of specific issues such as abortion, the integrity of the Supreme Court, gun control, immigration, etc. To be sure any President must speak out and advocate strongly for the specific measures he or she believes are essential to the future of the nation's citizens. But they must do more if they are are to have any hope of bringing the country together, of building confidence, of "restoring the Soul of America". 

They need to speak to the American public as THEIR PRESIDENT. They need to explain the state of the Nation, realistically, warts and all. They need to articulate a coherent and non-partisan vision of where we want to be.They need to recognize the polarization of views objectively without demonizing either side  (even while not agreeing with them). They should try to explain the origins of this polarization and what each of us can to to address it. They need to put key issues, like inflation and crime and immigration in context and relate them to a common vision for the country. 

I am under no illusion. Done as well as possible this will not result in some golden era of all people being together. There will always be outliers. But we dare not allow this fact to deter us from pursuing a bold uniting vision. A majority of people, perhaps a vast majority will unite behind a leader who they are confident has a vision worthy and befitting the nation we love, a credible set of prioiites to achieve that and who above all knows and believes that it will require ALL of us working together and respecting one another to achieve it. 

I write thinking of the future not simply to lament missed past opportunities. I write this  continuing to be convinced that President Biden has it in his mind and heart to lead this way. It will undoubtedly be even harder to lead this way in the next two years given the likely Republican leadership of the House and maybe Senate after the mid-terms only ten days away. But I hope he will try. He still is our President. Like no one else, he can bring people together. He can speak in a different way to the Nation; "fire side"chat conversations if you will. He can act as the People's President. 

Our nation desperately needs this. Of that I am sure.

John Pepper

Confronting the Risk of This Precarious Moment

 Over the course of the last nine months, I have posted several blogs related to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.  The first dealing with the threat of that invasion was on January 27; title:  Whether Ukraine.  I expressed the deep belief then that it was in no one’s interest, including not Russia’s, for Putin to invade Ukraine. 

 A month later, he did exactly that, in what I went on to describe 8 months later, in September, as a “cruel, tragic and misbegotten war.” 

I believe Putin's misguided and misinformed decision will go down in the annals of history as one of the worst decisions ever made by the leader of a major country. 

 

The killing continues.  Coverage of this war today has faded some, but it’s still a “top of the news” item, as it should be.  However, I find that it is being reported on now almost like it is a football game.  It secures its space among coverage of the baseball playoffs, discussion of inflation and the upcoming mid-term elections in the United States. 

 

On October 15, a Wall Street Journal article written by Peggy Noonan echoes what I have been saying for some months. 

 “As the stakes got higher, leaders have become all too casual—unserious and sloppy.  Part of it is social media, on which the whole world is hooked.  Ambassadors launch taunting tweets like rockets and getting high-fives. What is needed is a serious, weighty, textured document that reflects the gravity of the moment we are in; a full Oval Office address that doesn’t emote but speaks rationally to a nation of thoughtful people.  A big definitional statement.  Where are we?  Are we communicating with the Kremlin?  How should the American people be thinking about all this?”

 

Almost every columnist now is comparing the current moment to the Cuban Missile Crisis. And rightly so.  Yet Noonan aptly writes, “We are not addressing this the way JFK did.  When JFK spoke, it was in a studied, careful way and to the entire nation.”

 

I fear that leaders, including our leaders, are failing to give enough attention to the consequences here.  I don’t think Putin is.  I’m not sure Biden is.  I hope I am wrong. I hope we have serious back-channel, quiet discussions going on. 

 

 As Noonan writes, “There are times in life and diplomacy when silence must be maintained as circumstances evolve and new options emerge.  But we’re not maintaining silence.  I ask for the efficiency of thoughtfulness, sometimes it can cool things down or slow them down.  If we’re traveling toward Armageddon, the slow route is best.”

 

I pray for the kind of wisdom that prevailed with Nikita Khrushchev and JFK at the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis.  They thought of options with imagination and with an eyes-wide-open, realistic view of the consequences of making the wrong decision.  Leaders need to do that today.

What Walter Lippman Has to Teach Us Today

 The more I read about Walter Lippman, the more I like him.   Old-time values, though you have to take his arrogance and his self-serving nature with his value-based prescriptions.  Writing over 75 years ago, he grieved that the ancient solidities of religious faith were in decline.  He wrote about this with passion and pessimism, especially after Hitler had conquered all of Western Europe.  

There is much that can produce similar pessimism today but we cannot allow this to conquer us. 

Lippman had the tendency to blame all of America’s troubles on its enemies, illuminating the  tendency of each of us is to look down on those who disagree with us.  He thought our salvation lay within ourselves and could not be achieved by looking elsewhere.

“Our civilization can be maintained and restored,” he wrote in 1940, “only by remembering and rediscovering the truths, and by reestablishing the virtuous habits on which it was founded.  There is no use looking into the blank future for some new and fancy revelation of what man needs in order to live.  The elemental principles of work and sacrifice and duty—and the transcendent criteria of truth, justice and righteousness—and the grace of love and charity are the things which have made men free…only in this profound, this stern, in this tested wisdom shall we find once more the light and the courage we need.”  

Surely, words for today, words for this moment, words for eternity. 

 

What’s the role of religion in all of this, I ask.  Is it an essential requirement for one to lead a moral life?  I wouldn’t say that.  I know people, a couple of my children among them, who are leading moral lives and yet they would not call themselves religious.  But they do believe there are higher values that stem from something outside themselves.  For me, religion has played that role.  Not alone.  A deep appreciation of nature, of humanity at its best leads me to the same conviction in the imperative of certain moral values.  But religion, as I’ve understood and tried to practice it, has played a bigger role than anything.

  

Timeless wisdom from Walter Lippman “Those in high places are more than the administrators of government bureaus.  They are more than the writers of laws.  They are the custodians of the nation’s ideals, of its permanent hopes, of the faith that makes a nation out of the mere aggregation of individuals.” 

 

 A message for leaders in every walk of life today and forever. 

 

A Cruel, Tragic and Misbegotten War--Putin's Decision to Invade Ukraine--The Screw Turns

When it happened seven months ago, I could not believe Putin's lack of sense and foresight in deciding to invade and attempt to take over the entirety of Ukraine.  His misjudgment of the attitude of the Ukrainian people, their willingness and ability to fight, as well as his misjudgment of the capability of the Russian Army and misreading of history were appalling. 

 

This invasion has caused deaths and injuries numbering in the hundreds of thousands.  It has resulted in the displacement of close to fifteen million Ukrainians from their homes.  It has resulted in a shattering of the economy of Ukraine and the burden of dramatically higher energy prices for the whole world. 

 

It has isolated Russia and turned it into a pariah. It has cut off communications between educational and cultural institutions.  Russia has become isolated economically, politically, culturally and morally. 

 

Putin’s attack, premised as it was on the threat of the expansion of NATO, has accomplished exactly the opposite: the accession of two new close-to-Russia countries to NATO, and a strengthening of the ties and commitments within it.

  

During the last three weeks we have witnessed six significant events deepening the reality of the folly of Putin’s decision:

 

1.          The Ukrainians counter-offensive in northeast Ukraine has re-taken more territory from the Russians than it took during the war to date.

 

2.          The summit held in last week in Uzbekistan, which included President Xi of China, and Prime Minister Modi of India, had to be a real downer for Putin.

 

Xi did nothing to express his commitment to what Putin is doing in Ukraine.  In fact, he didn’t even mention Ukraine. His silence spoke volumes.

 

   Modi, on his part, lectured Putin on the need to stop the war and achieve peace.

   Russia is isolated. 

 

3.          The discovery of mass graves in the liberated city of Izyum in northwestern Ukraine is putting a spotlight on the horrors Russian soldiers had inflicted on Ukrainian citizens.  Some of the bodies had ropes around their necks; others showed signs of torture.

 

4.  Many of those living in Donetsk and Luhansk who were initially happy that Russia was coming in, changed their mind as they saw the way Russian soldiers were treating the Ukrainian citizens.  Their conduct is quite understandably turning away many of those who due to their family lineage and proximity to Russia had been sympathetic to Russia.  

 

5.          The shades appear to be lifting in the state press in Russia on what is really going on.  There is pushback on Putin, not enough to overthrow him, but enough to surely unsettle him and his supporters from people who are criticizing the war effort and implicitly if not explicitly the folly of what is happening. 

6.      Putin's calling up 300,000 so-called reservists (many have had no training) has unmasked the fiction that this not a real war and is producing significant push-back. Over 200,000 men have reportedly fled Russia in little more than one week. 

 

The stakes and risks involved in this war are being raised as I write this by a sham-referendum conducted under gun point in eastern and south eastern Ukraine and the likelihood Russia will move to annex these regions making them part of Russia. This increases the challenge of achieving a negotiated settlement which Ukraine will sign on to. In truth, however, that is the only conceivable outcome if we are avoid a multi-year, costly battle of attrition. 

My view of this war from the start has been that Putin's decision to invade Ukraine will go down in history as one of the cruelest and misbegotten self-immolating undertakings ever. 

Its deadly impact on the people ofUkraine and others in the world suffering from its consequences is abundantly clear.  The harm to Russia in lives lost and the severance of connection with the West—economic, cultural and technology—is horrendous.  It will take years, perhaps decades to recover.  The sooner that recovery begins, the better. I remain optimistic that in time it will happen. A long term relationship for Russia with the West seems much more plausible than with China and India or Russia's going it alone, isolated as it is becoming.

 

In the current moment, we must continue to support Ukraine in its drive to regain territory even if incrementally. We should not allow Putin's thinly veiled threat to use tactical nuclear weapons to deter us from hanging tough, without provoking a direct confrontation with Russia. The longer this continues the weaker I believe Putin's position will become. He is yielding both the moral and military high ground. Patience I believe will be rewarding.

Longer term, I continue to see no alternative but new leadership in Russia. I write this conscious of the challenge of achieving it and the uncertainty of what that new leadership will bring.

To Be Hopeful In Bad Times--Howard Zinn

 TO BE HOPEFUL IN BAD TIMES is not just foolishly

romantic. It is based on the fact that human history is
a history not only of cruelty, but also of compassion,
sacrifice, courage, kindness.
What we choose to
emphasize in this complex history will determine our
lives. If we see only the worst, it destroys our capacity
to do something. If we remember those times and
places--and there are so many--where people have
behaved magnificently, this gives us the energy to act,
and at least the possibility of sending this spinning
top of a world in a different direction.
And if we do act, in however small a way, we don't
have to wait for some grand utopian future. The future
is an infinite succession of presents, and to live now as
we think human beings should live, in defiance of all
that is bad around us, is itself a marvelous victory.

Assessing the Record of Biden's Presidency

Way too soon to say, especially with two years left on his current term, but I believe history will judge the first two years of Biden's presidency far more positively than he is being given credit for by most of the media, almost all Republicans and even many Democrats. To wit:

1. Biggest infrastructure bill in modern history. (Should be making more of the benefits of this).

2. Biggest climate bill in modern history.

3. Repaired credibility of US with allies.

4. Led the west in supporting Ukraine against the invasion by Russia--essential to where we are today.

5. Ended hopeless war in Afghanistan. 

6. Appointing very large number of qualified judges. 

7. Bringing manufacturing jobs back to US for the first time in decades, in part due to the provisions of the climate bill.

8. Acting to support a stronger economy than any other major nation, dramatically signaled by significantly strengthening dollar.

9. Very low unemployment.

10. Further expansion of health care coverage.

All-together, a very strong record of accomplishment in a highly partisan environment.

My biggest disappointment so far is the failure to make an effective attempt to try to marshal something other than a "zero sum" adversarial relationship with China, though I don't know if this was possible given Xi's aspirations. I had hoped Biden could help narrow the partisan divide but I do not believe that was possible given the current still Trump-infested state of the Republican party.

Reposting My Most Read Blog--"Professor of the Jungle"

 

 PROFESSOR OF THE JUNGLE"

APRIL 25, 2017

 I love the story that Phil Knight, the founder of Nike, tells in his wonderful memoir " Shoe Dog". 

 The year was 1997.  Still haunted by the Vietnam War, Knight had vowed that someday Nike would have a factory in or near Saigon.  By 1997, he had four.  He was in Saigon.  The company was to be honored and celebrated by the Vietnamese government as one of the nation’s top five generators of foreign currency.  At one point, his hosts graciously asked what they could do for him, what would make the trip special and memorable.  

 

“I’d like to meet the 86-year-old General Võ Nguyen Giáp, the man who singlehandedly defeated the Japanese, the French, the Americans and the Chinese", Knight replied. 

 

General Giáp joined the group the next day.  The first thing Knight noticed was his size.  He was maybe 5’4”.  And humble.  Knight remembered that he smiled as he did, “Shyly, uncertainly.  But there was an intensity about him…a kind of glittery confidence,” the kind he had seen in great coaches and great business leaders.  

 

Giáp waited for Knight to ask a question.

 

It was simple:   “How did you do it?”  The corners of Giáp’s mouth flickered.  A smile?  Maybe?, Knight recalled.   Giáp thought and thought.  “I was,” he said, “a professor of the jungle.”

 

“A professor of the jungle.”  

For me, it says it all: being close to your work, close to your environment, close to your consumers, close to your competition, close to your people.  That kind of closeness--I refer to it as "intimacy"-- grows out of love, a passionate commitment to a purpose.  That kind of closeness, that kind of intimacy leads to great accomplishments, to winning, to a maniacal commitment to excellence and, ultimately, to the satisfaction of a job well done.

 

The Battle to Preserve Our Democracy--We Are in this Together--The Talk I Hoped President Biden Would Give

 President Biden spoke truth to the Nation in his prime time address on Thursday night. And he needed to speak the truth that our democracy is under attack. He was genuine and passionate and his commitment to our country, never in doubt, shone brightly. 

However, it was not the talk I hoped he'd give. It is unlikely to have convinced people who are not already convinced of the very real threat to democracy which faces us Why? Because it did not go nearly far enough in drawing on the common strands of commitment to our Nation's ideals which unite the great majority of Americans, across party, age, gender, race and ethnicity. 

Here in short form and very incomplete and inadequate words is what I hoped he might say:

"My fellow Americans--Democrats, Republicans, Independents and whatever else you might call yourselves--I address myself tonight as the President of each and every one of you. 

I came to this office because I believe with all my heart and all my soul in this country; because I believe in the people of this country; because I believe in you. 

I will speak frankly to you tonight,  sharing the truth as I see it of where we stand as a Nation and what are the opportunities and challenges ahead of us. 

I speak to you at a time of great challenge: As you know, we face historically high levels of inflation, the lingering impact of Covid, Russia's unprovoked and cruel attack on Ukraine, and democracy under attack in countries ranging from Russia to China to Turkey and to several of our Latin America friends.

However, the greatest challenges we face is in our country. These challenges go the heart of who we are as a people; they concern the health of our democracy and the trust we have in one another to preserve it. 

Make no mistake. Our democracy is under serious threat today. When people, led by Donald Trump,  deny the legitimacy of elections, elections shown to have been carried out correctly under bi-partisan examination; when groups of people and prominent leaders threaten outright violence if future election results don't conform to their desires; when people are encouraged to barn storm the capital of our country in order to overturn the election and when senior leaders campaign for office on the promise of doing the same thing in the next election, we have a real threat. 

We dare not wink at this threat or pretend it doesn't exist or dismiss it as something we don't need to worry about. Denials like this have preceded the demise of democracy in other countries throughout history.

President Trump's unwillingness to acknowledge the results of the 2020 election, and that of his extreme followers, undercuts the very fabric of our democracy. It must be vigorously denounced for what it is. A fabricated and cancerous lie, an assault on democracy. 

I want to make it perfectly clear: I am not suggesting that the majority of Republicans don't share the deep commitment to the precious value of democracy and the need to fight against any threat to it. I  believe the majority of Republicans share this conviction. 

We have had different views on key issues across party and other lines for time immemorial in this country. Those differences, when debated, openly, often fiercely, have usually served us well. That will never change. Nor should it. We will continue to have these differences. On women's right to choose balanced with the right of an unborn child. On gun regulations that reduce the tragic loss of life we see today without limiting the rights of legitimate gun owners. On the pace of attacking climate change, just to name a few. 

In advancing these necessary and important debates, all of us, those of us on the Right, Left and middle of the political spectrum, must beware of allowing legitimate and important policy difference morph into such moral and angry condemnation of the "other" that we don't listen to one another's point of view and the reasons for it. Without that we will never find our way to the balanced positions which if not perfect will lead to progress and a better world. 

We need to recognize that with all our differences and our diversity, both anchors to our unique strength as a Nation, we are the beneficiaries of a great land and a great heritage--a heritage committed to the high ideals expressed so cogently expressed in our Declaration of Independence, ideals which if not fully met have guided us to progress. 

I firmly believe we have the opportunity to make our country and our world better for those that follow us, provided we never forget that we are in this together and must and can work together to make life better for all. And that underpinning it all, we do what is necessary to preserve our democracy from the threats it faces today. 

The past year with all its challenges, which I in no way minimize,  shows we can work together. Science has stepped forward as hospitals, health care workers and many others launched vaccines to combat Covid in record time. Bi-partisan support has led to the biggest infrastructure bill in seventy years. Though it did not have the bi-partisan support I hoped for, we passed legislation providing the biggest advance in fighting climate change in our history and the biggest expansion of health care benefits for Americans since President Obama. 

And it is not just government working together.  Corporations and other organizations have stepped forward  with renewed commitment to tackle the vestiges of systemic racism.  

My friends, my confidence in the future is based on two things: our history which has seen us rise to the occasion when faced with the biggest challenges, whether that be war or economic depression or a decline in the cohesive bonds of trust in one another. And the other--the most important thing-- is our nature as a collective body of individuals, of all of us as a people. A people that with all our differences, all our disagreements, find ourselves bound together in ultimately appreciating the precious and, yes, rare freedom and opportunity which our democracy affords us. And from that recognition the unquenchable commitment by each one of us to fight to preserve that democracy, no matter what. Because we just wouldn't have it any other way. 

Democracy Is Hard to Achieve, Hard to Retain and Easy To Lose--We In The United States Are At Risk of Losing It

A recent New York Times carried a sobering headline:  “Tunisia’s Hope of Democracy Unraveled in Political Failings.”

 

As the aspiration for democracy which marked the Arab Spring in 2011 withered in Egypt, Libya and Algeria, hope remained.  There was Tunisia.  The Arab Spring’s greatest hope for democratic change.  Until now that is. 

 

As The New York Times reported, “Disillusioned with the failure of their elected political leaders to make good on the revolution’s processes, Tunisians voted overwhelmingly for an inexperienced outsider for president in 2019.  Two years later in 2021, that president, Kais Saied, swept aside parliament and most other checks on his power to establish one-man rule.  Last month, he solidified his power grab in a new constitution approved by a national referendum.  More than a decade after Tunisia threw off authoritarian rule, the only surviving democracy to have emerged from the Arab Spring was all but dead.” 

 

I won’t try to go through all of the failed policies, the corruption, the turnstile, weak leadership (ten prime ministers in ten years) which led to this sad outcome.  An overriding cause is something that is affecting us in the United States and in many other countries in a deep and alarming way today. 

 

I refer to the demise of trust in government itself.  I refer to sharp polarization and divides between people. I refer to the knee jerk tendency for legitimate policy differences to morph into absolute moral judgements, one person to another. I refer to opportunistic, self-centered leadership in contrast to character based, servant leadership.  I refer to corruption.  

Lastly and vitally, I refer to the failure to fight for democracy by those like you and me, who are in a position to know how precious democracy is and the overhanging, ever present threat to its continued existence

 

It is easy to forget that viewed across the span of history, democracy--inclusive democracy which confers the vote on every person, in fairly administered and respected elections--is an extremely rare and recent phenomenon. It didn't exist in the United Sates during the first 150 years of its history. It didn't exist in the monarchies of Europe through most of its history. Nor did it in the Ottoman, Austria-Hungarian, Chinese or Russian Empires over the centuries.

Moreover, democracy is a very frail thing. The history of governments in Latin America and Africa shows the enormous challenge of putting in place and sustaining a truly democratic form of government. As the "Economist" reports, since 2015 over a dozen presidents in Africa have ignored or abandoned term limits, some through constitutional amendments. There has been a string of both amendments and constitutional rewrites in Latin American countries, including Bolivia, Ecuador and Venezuela. But whereas previous waves of constitutional reform tended to put in place liberal principles, this latest wave goes the other way.

The inclination of leaders to seek power (and wealth) and for a majority of  citizens to place their faith or be compelled to place their faith in a charismatic leader hoping they will be a savior is written large in history.  

Yes, true democracy is fragile. 

Whatever democratic character Germany and Italy evidenced in the late 1800s and the first decades of the 20th century was overwhelmed by Hitler and Mussolini and their cronies. They leveraged the power of victimhood and the claim of unique national and racial superiority to assert dictatorial control. Those who saw the threat of what was happening underrated the risk, felt they could control it, and with few exceptions failed to speak up and unite. Most of them perished. 

The sprouting of hope that Russia and China were moving to more democratic forms of government which many people, including me, felt in the 1990s and early 2000s,  has been quashed. Similarly, over the past decade, we have seen the erosion of democracy in countries ranging from Hungary, Poland and most recently and alarmingly to India.

 

This brings me to the situation we face today in the United States.

It’s all too easy for us in the United States--and by "us" I include "me"--to reach the comforting conclusion that while there is some risk of our democracy eroding, we don't need to fear a calamitous end.  Why is this? We take reassurance in the protection afforded by the "checks and balances" of our government. We look to the shared responsibilities of the Executive (Presidential), Legislative and ultimately the Judicial branch and the balanced role of the states and federal government to shield us from a draconian outcome.  Above all,  we look back on our history and take reassurance in having overcome challenges before.  So,  we assume it will happen again.

Is that a safe assumption? No, it is not.  

There have been times in our history when all three branches of government were unified in denying the equal right to vote to Blacks and in other periods, Chinese. The Supreme Court, which we would like to look to as the final objective arbiter of what is right, has often been wrong in securing true democracy. Just consider the Supreme Court decisions in the 1870s which invalidated legislative acts which had conferring rights on Blacks. Or consider "Plessy v. Ferguson" which codified discrimination in the 1890s. 

The recent Supreme Court decision to overturn the precedent of "Roe v. Wade" has further undermined the trust in this branch of government. Despite the claims of those judges supporting a pure "originalist" interpretation of the Constitution, court decisions have often, if not usually, reflected political inclinations of the judge.

 

What worries me the most for the future today is the dramatic decline of trust in virtually all our key institutions. The decline in trust in one another as indicated by our acute polarization. And as a result of all of this, the decline in trust in our very ability to govern.

 

There are numerous causes for this.  Gerrymandering, with its accompanying demise of truly contested accountable elections, is a big one.  My son David Pepper’s book, Laboratories of Autocracy, makes this abundantly clear.

 

My key point is that democracy in this country is on trial. We need to fight for it.  We cannot take it for granted or assume that, because we have been able to retain it over our short 250-year history, it will continue.

 

There was no guarantee we’d remain as one nation at the time of the Civil War.  It could have gone the other way. 

 

There was no guarantee that Donald Trump might not have succeeded in overturning the 2020 election.  That was his intent.  He had lots of support and still retains much of it. It could have gone the other way in 2020.. In fact, we can't rule out its going the other way in 2024. Many of the Republican candidates currently running to be Secretary of State--a key position influencing elections outcomes--are declared deniers of the legitimacy of the 2020 election even to this day. 

 

The alarm bells are ringing.  We need to speak out and we need to act. To learn what to do, I urge you read my son David Pepper's book,  Laboratories of Autocracy. In the final chapter, he pinpoints thirty actions we need to take to preserve our democracy. For each of us as individuals, they prominently include:

1. Working to elect candidates at every level--federal, state and local--who are explicitly committed to making it easy for every person to vote and to accept the results of fairly administered elections.

2. Support legislation and referenda that eliminate the corrosive impact of gerrymandering and result in congressional district lines that lead to fair representation, contested elections and hence accountability.

 

When Will We Ever Learn

 

This plaintive lyric from Pete Seeger's unforgettable song---"Where Have All the Flowers Gone"-- moves me deeply today for many reasons. 

 

"When will we ever learn" that men, women and children all around the world--all of us--care and want the same things:  peace and security in our lives: knowing we are appreciated and that we matter with people whom we respect; having opportunities for personal progress and to enjoy a reasonable level of prosperity?

"When we ever learn" that simply listening to another person, coming to know their story, is the greatest gift we can offer them--and ourselves.

 

"When will we ever learn" that in order to resolve inevitable differences in viewpoint and beliefs among different people, we have to be able to talk with one another to share our views and do so with mutual respect, building a level of trust that permits and leads to honest conversation? 

 

"When will we ever learn" that we cannot achieve the peaceful coexistence we desperately need with other powerful nations-- each with their own cultures, traditions and beliefs-- unless we talk with one another with respect and a mutual desire to see each other’s point of view? To learn what are the "red lines"are for each of us and how we can respect them without betraying our own most fundamental interests?

 

"When will we ever learn to act" on the reality that there are common challenges and opportunities that demand that nations work together to secure not only their own interests but their very existence and that of the planet.  I refer above all to the challenges of nuclear disaster, climate change, terrorism and rampant disease, as has been abundantly evident with COVID.

Yes, “when will we ever learn?”  More to the point, perhaps, is the question "how can we learn?"  And indeed, “can we learn?”  

Honestly, I’m not sure.  But there is room for hope. History presents examples when we have acted on this learning . In the last century we have seen the nations of Europe, which had been in almost constant warfare with one another, come together in the European Union. Agreements and common understanding among the nuclear powers--the United States and Russia prominent among them-- have led to the avoidance of the use of nuclear weapons for over seventy years. 

In the 1990's, after the peaceful  dissolution of the Soviet Union and China's path of  development which appeared compatible with fostering global unity, we had a glimmer of hope-- a shining moment, even as it has turned out a despairingly short one--when we  (or at least many of us) thought we had reached a point of stability, of living together, not perfectly, but on the whole constructively. 

And yet, as we now are all too well aware, over the course of the last 20 years, we have witnessed in the deteriorating relationship of the West with Russia and China and continuing with Iran, the shattering of this hope of living together peacefully, not free of rivalry, not perfectly, but constructively, recognizing and acting on our all too obvious common interests. 

   

What more can I say other than the imperative of not to give up on achieving this.  It’s beyond my ability to say how we can do this.  It’s not beyond my ability or experience to say we must find a way to do this. And that we should proceed with not only determination but hope-- for history teaches we have made progress in the past-- led by individuals like Nelson Mandela, Abraham Lincoln, Mikhail Gorbachev, Lee Kuan Yew, Konrad Adenauer,  Martin Luther King and countless unsung heroes in every walk of life. Individuals like you and me,  deciding to do what they believe is right and necessary, no matter the risk and challenge, and joining with others in the quest.  Individuals facing seemingly insuperable challenges, responding-- "nevertheless"-- we will continue on. 

 

Preserving the Basic Right to Vote Today--A Timeless Battle as Illuminated by an Imagined Story From My Son, David Pepper

 

My son, David,  is a student of history and a writer of fiction and politics, including his most recent book "Laboratories of Autocracy". David has been consumed (as we all have) by the history of the violent  denial of rights (including to vote) for Blacks following the brief period of Reconstruction. He has channeled what this experience might have looked like through the imagined experience of a Black Southern teen born in the mid-1880. 

I am proud to share this for your consideration in the belief that it frames this terrible chapter of history in a powerfully meaningful and personal way. 

******************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

 

"Often, I think about the lives led by those who came before us. Perhaps due to my fiction writing, I try to put myself into an individual’s shoes.

And one “life” I can’t stop thinking about is that of a 16-year old Black Southern teen in the mid-1880s.

Let’s imagine what his life looked like then, & what it became.

In the 1880s, this teen sees a world where more Black voters are registered in Louisiana than White voters. He sees large numbers of Black voters registered AND voting in other southern states as well. Black turnout in the 1880 Presidential election is 61%.

And with this high level of Black participation in elections, this 16-year old grows up seeing Black men (not women yet) serving in office at almost every level. We’re talking mayors and sheriffs, state reps and judges, even State Supreme Court justices, house speakers, lieutenant governors and members of Congress.

I would never want to understate the racism and challenges this 16-year old faces in daily life, but when it comes to participation in the nation’s democracy, things at least look to be moving in a good direction.

And if he studies his recent history, this teen also is buoyed by the response of President Grant when white supremacists first tried to stop this new Black participation. Grant brought the full force of the federal government to bear to stop those efforts, including tackling terrorist violence that reared its ugly head when this teen was a toddler.

But as our 16 year old ages just a few years, things change.

As he and other Black voters come of age and try to vote or register in the late 1880s and 1890s, they begin to encounter a growing maze of rules and obstacles that keep more of them from doing so.  (And the reason given for the new obstacles is that Black voters like him are either not intelligent enough to vote or serve in government, or that they are so intelligent they have figured out how to game the system through “voter fraud” — so he knows these reasons don’t add up)

To give an example, in his 20s, this young man might’ve  been required to answer a complex set of challenging questions as he tries to register. And if he fails he can’t vote.

But his white neighbor who is less literate than he is, and also fails….he still gets to register because his grandfather was registered to vote in 1864, when our young man’s grandfather wasn’t (for obvious reasons).

This young man also encounters other obstacles to voting (new taxes he can’t afford, party primaries he’s barred from voting in because he’s black, etc.), but the most real is of course the specter of violence that Black voters increasingly face when they try to participate. And the sad reality that after such violence happens, none of the perpetrators are ever held accountable even though people know exactly who they are.

And this young man of course begins asking himself…why should I try and take a test I know I will fail, or pay that cumulative tax I can’t afford, when I also risk my own safety (or that of my new family) by doing so? So he probably stops trying to vote in the way his father and grandfather did.

And his teenage confidence that the federal government will protect him? After 1890, that also fades, when Congress fails to pass legislation that would’ve repeated the fierce, Grantian resistance to these renewed threats to Black participation.  (Yes, it dies by way of the filibuster).

And over the next decade, without that federal support, his memory of the 1880s fades. In its place, for the same reason he doesn’t, no one around our 20-something is registered, or votes. They are essentially barred by law, and if they try to, they risk violence, or unemployment or other consequences for them or their families. And by now, the federal government has walked away. They are alone, no longer part of America’s democracy.

It’s so bad, that by the turn of the century, the 128,000 registered Black voters in Louisiana falls to the low 1000s—by 1906, 1,342. By 1910. Only 730! In S Carolina, Mississippi, Alabama, similar declines. From 300,000 collectively to around 3,000 in each state by 1900.

So when he’s in his 30s, unlike when he was 16, no Black man he knows votes. While White folks all around, even the ones who couldn’t pass that test, always vote. So of course their candidates always win.

Around the time he is 40, even presidential elections pass by with hardly any Black involvement. (2%, versus the 60% when he was 16).

But far more than just not voting, the results of that lack of voting are everywhere.

First, all those Black officials he grew up seeing all around him, at every level…by the time he’s in his 30s, they’re all gone. From local office. From judgeships. From statehouses. From Congress

Second, as a result, every year new racist laws target every aspect of his life, & every Black person he knows. Rules that weren’t there when he was a child, or a teen. And since he and they can’t vote, they can’t change those laws. And whenever the most educated people he knows go to court & challenge them, court after court says that despite clear words suggesting otherwise, there is nothing in the law or Constitution that requires them to change a thing. So they’re stuck.

Worse, in his 30s, 40s & later, this man watches as the most racist & vile of those who created this new Southern apartheid system are rewarded for their hate, rising to become Govs, Congressmen & Senators in Washington, treated as national leaders by politicians all across the country—including presidents. And that hateful handiwork—work that forever altered the course of his life—is celebrated as the names of its architects begin to appear on buildings & bridges & statues in town after town. Even in Washington.

If this man reaches his 60s and 70s, he does start to see small signs of change. His and others’ grandkids who fought in WW2 come back expecting more. Demanding more. He cheers on Jackie Robinson when he enters baseball. He reads that some of those lawsuits start to succeed, on paper at least, even if he doesn’t see any changes in his town.

But even these feel small, since unless this man lives into his 90s or more, from his mid-20s on, this man will likely never see a local Black official—when they were present at all levels when he was 16. And he for the most part will never see any change to the Jim Crow laws that upended his world when he was in his teens, 20s and 30s.

Unless he makes it to close to 100, he will die not knowing if the new generation of young people demanding change will achieve it, or face the angry backlash, violence and lack of federal support he a century before.

And while he may have achieved personal happiness and meaning  in many other ways,  THAT is the trajectory of his public life as an American.

Now, I hope you see why I can’t stop thinking about this man’s life.

I would love to talk to him, and hear more about the forgotten and intentionally erased history of that original world he grew up in. I would love to hear him explain what the failure to fight for a full democracy back in the 1880s and 1890s did to him and the world he knew.  I imagine he’d remind us that what happened was not inevitable. But was a product of poor decisions along the way. Not just by the racists and White supremacists. But by the others. Who at key moments chose not to fight. Or chose to compromise to get other things done, while he paid the price. People who took for granted that progress would just continue.

Why else do I think so much about this 16-year old from the 1880s?

Because I think every day about the 16-year old girls & boys of today. Or slightly older. Or my 8- and 5-yr olds. Who grew up in a country where certain rights and processes felt guaranteed, and generally have been taken for granted.

But how recent events have shown, as in the late 1800s, that taking any of them for granted turns out to be a mistake.

And how, like our 1880s teenager, their lives will be shaped by the actions we take in the next few years—for the better, if we revive the democracy and core rights we have taken for granted. Or for the dramatically worse, if we let democracy collapse in front of our eyes.

We have so much to learn from the Black Southern teenager from the 1880s. Let’s learn it all".

The Incredible Challenge of Maintaining Focus on the Most Existential Issues

I am reminded again and again of  how challenging it is for us as people to keep our eye focused on what, in truth, we know to be our most existential issues. 

 

We have a habit of “kicking the can down the road” on issues that, mistakenly, seem distant and remote. Or issues that while recognizing their importance,  we see as overwhelming and beyond our ability to resolve or even improve. 

 

I was reminded of this sobering reality the other morning as I read a New York Times article disclosing a recent Sienna poll which revealed that only 1% of U.S. voters regarded the environment as their top priority concern; and even those under the age of 30, the number only increased to 3%.  Like  many others, the commitment to confront the environment  has been diluted by concerns about inflation, crime,  COVID, abortion, gun violence and the revealings of the January 6th Congressional Commission.

 

It has ever been thus.  Our memories are short; our focus inevitably shifts to the short term, the immediate. To call the issues such as those I have cited "distractions" would be a disservice to their importance. But if they take our eye off the continued aggressive pursuit of the most existential issues, the world we all live in is going to be in deep trouble.

 

What are the most important existential issues?  Each of us will have our own views.  Mine include the environment, nuclear proliferation, systemic racism, enabling every child to grow up with the education and health they deserve and having the courage and wisdom to engage in creating win-win relationships  and agreements with countries and individuals with whom we do not agree.  Prominent in the last category today is creating a sustainable, peaceful, geo-political relationship between the U.S./West and China.

 

As we face up to the challenge of maintaining focus and consistent action against the most existential issues, we must at all cost not throw up our hands or engage in unrelenting lamenting.  

 

We need to recognize that the most important existential issues have always required consistent, long-term action by people who believed in change and who were willing to persist and even risk their lives to pursue it.  Take the existential issue of slavery. Abolitionists fought that not for months or years but for decades to eradicate it. They did not give up. Don't forget. In the late 18th Century, slavery was a legal institution in every country of the Americas. 

A century later is was outlawed in very country except Brazil

 

 Yet, even now, despite all the progress, vestiges of slavery remain. Discrimination based on race and color and systemic racism remains. We cannot give up of the fight for racial equality of opportunity. This is why I and my wife and countless others have been committed to the Mission of the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center for 25 years.

 

The existential issues of women's rights (including the right to vote), of recognizing the rights of LGBTQ women and men, and of recognizing the dignity of all  people, regardless of  their race, gender, education, social class or religion are all ones on which we have made progress-- thanks to brave leadership and to no small amount of good will. 

 

However, they remain with us. We have much more to do.

 

In truth, most of the existential issues I’ve cited don't lend themselves to a permanent solution.  There won’t be any end to the need to address climate change as best we understand it and learn how to best confront it.  There won’t be a permanent solution to giving everyone the not only the right to vote but easy access to it.  Many issues won’t only not be resolved in our lifetime, they won’t be solved for generations to come.  But we cannot allow that to depress us or dilute our efforts to do better. It doesn’t mean we can’t make significant improvements. People have proved they can. Nor does it relieve us of the obligation to do all we can, in our space, and in our time,  to advance that improvement in whatever way we can. 

 

I keep coming back to the words of the Talmud:  “We are not required to complete the task, but nor are we allowed to desist from pursuing it.” We must continue to do what we believe is right, conscious of the need to keep our minds and hearts open to one another and to new learning.