168 is a personal expression of my First Amendment rights. It is a newsletter I email on an ad hoc basis, sharing my thoughts on various topics. Archived newsletters can be found at www.1hundredsixty8.substack.com./archive Please add your comments by clicking the REPLY button at the end of this piece.
Note: As we mark 250 years since the Declaration of Independence was issued, I feel it is the appropriate time to assess the nation’s progress towards a society in which all persons are created as equals, “with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.” To that end, the question we are obligated to ask ourselves is whether our government, which “derives its just powers from the consent of the governed,” has secured these rights.
“The Chinese use two brush strokes to write the word 'crisis.' One brush stroke stands for danger; the other for opportunity. In a crisis, be aware of the danger--but recognize the opportunity.”― John F. Kennedy
For many Americans, these are troubling times, a period the late Hunter Thompson might have called ‘Fear and Loathing in America’. This decade may not be the Roaring Twenties, but we seem headed for the same disastrous situation the nation faced a century ago. No matter what tribe they belong to, the natives are restless. Those who are pro-democracy are anxious about the chaotic, authoritarian bent of the Trump regime, its Wiley Coyote incompetence, and Boss Tweed-level corruption. Those not consumed by politics worry about the shrinking purchasing power of their dollars. At the same time, corporate profits are at record highs. Right-wing American First-ers are figuratively up in arms over Trump’s reckless foreign forays, especially the botched war with Iran. The institutions we believed would maintain a balance between government and the liberty of the people- Congress and the Supreme Court, for example- have proven to be unequal to the task. Worse yet, some have been perverted in the service of a wannabe king.
All of this - and more- spells crisis for America.
Where Are Our Principles?
Despite the lofty, aspirational language of the Declaration of Independence and the idealistic framework bequeathed to us by the Constitution, we must accept the reality that, as a society, a nation conceived as an idea, we are in the midst of a betrayal of the principles the Founders laid out for us. A sufficient minority of Americans are in the thrall of a demagogue, a would-be autocrat who views the Presidency as the means to enrich himself, a power-hungry narcissist who plays on people’s fears and promotes divisiveness.
One of many reasons for Trump’s success is the persistence of anti-intellectualism,1 which has always been part of the American zeitgeist; it is ironic that, in the midst of the ‘Information Age’, many of us are poorly informed. In Federalist No. 10, James Madison argued that an educated public was a fundamental principle and a necessary condition for sustaining democratic institutions. 2 Contrast that concept with contemporary American society: Americans are a superficial people, preferring appearance and performance over substance, the ersatz over the genuine. We talk about freedom, about our liberty and rights, but are often quick to deny them to others who do not share our beliefs, or lifestyle, or skin color. We tolerate intolerance, even when it morphs into hate. We are violent.3 We see morality as important only when we can point out others’ transgressions. Religion may still present itself as the repository of moral rectitude, but it is also a convenient refuge for hypocrites and pedophiles. And, since many sects operate as tax-free profit centers, religion is a good cover for the greatest grift ever- selling eternal redemption. As for the economy, we are living through a period of crony capitalism, with the government favoring large business interests over the masses. The capitalist principle of a competitive free market is a chimera, a catchphrase disguising the extravagant extraction of the nation’s wealth by a very small minority.
The concept of American democracy4 accepts certain realities: one, humans have flaws; no one is perfect. Two, in light of the first point, the Founders’ genius was to separate the power of government among three coequal branches. They feared both the tyrannical rule of a monarch and the excesses of popular government. In seeking to balance the people’s prerogatives with the government’s authority, they created a structure that has required periodic updating and reform.
Now, however, that system of checks and balances is dysfunctional; a compliant Congress continues to cede its authority to the Executive Branch, failing to fulfill its oversight responsibilities vigorously and to hold the Administration accountable. The consequence is a rogue President free to rule by fiat, using Executive Orders rather than legislation. And while the lower Federal courts have blocked many of Donald Trump’s attempts to use powers not granted to the President by Congress or the Constitution, the Supreme Court has been amenable to giving Trump free rein.5
Where We Begin
The sense that so many things are wrong can be overwhelming. It invites a feeling of hopelessness. To give in is to surrender. On the other hand, while hope may be aspirational, it is not a plan. To attack a problem, we must dispense with emotion and approach it rationally. Before we can act, we should have specific goals. Here are several suggestions that might serve as a framework to achieve those goals. No matter our ideas and beliefs, I think they apply to all of us:
The smallest unit of society is the individual. The most basic rule for each of us is to treat others as we would like to be treated. It entails respect and tolerance for each other.
In a free society, the goal of politics and government is to do the greatest good for the greatest number. It is understood that we will not always agree, but disagreements should be resolved civilly. Politics operates on the basis of compromise and persuasion.
Ideology is a trap. It locks people into a rigid system of thought, thus blocking the curiosity necessary to explore other ideas. Progress is the child of open minds.
Otto von Bismarck, the first Chancellor of a united Germany, observed that, “Politics is the art of the possible, the attainable — the art of the next best. ” It is not a zero-sum game, with an absolute winner and loser. Accept that change is usually incremental.
Freedom and rights come with responsibilities and limits. We accept this construct as the inherent social contract. We are free to make many choices, but none that infringe upon others' rights. We also understand that the rule of law is the organizing principle for a peaceful and harmonious society.
Leaders and leadership are the keys to political success, so we must choose them carefully. As the writer P.J. O’Rourke put it, “Anyway, no drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we’re looking for the source of our troubles, we shouldn’t test people for drugs; we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed, and love of power. “ The motivations of a candidate should always be examined.
In a democracy, voting is a right, a privilege, and an obligation. Being an informed voter is a responsibility. The ballot is the mechanism by which each of us grants our power to our leaders.
What Are the Possibilities?
The past decade, bookended by the Presidential terms of Donald Trump and marked by a world scarred by a pandemic, left many Americans wondering whether things would change for the better. The thesis of this piece is… Well, maybe. The future is always uncertain, but moving forward requires choosing a destination. It is obvious that systemic changes are needed in our political and economic systems. Revitalizing these institutions will not be easy. Some changes will require constitutional amendments, a heavy lift. History tells us that periods of progress are often followed by backlash, such as we are currently experiencing in the wake of the civil rights era of the last century. So, in no particular order, here are changes we should discuss, a wish list we might prioritize or shorten:
Get money out of politics. Amend the Constitution to declare that money is not free speech. Fund candidates with tax dollars.
Legislate that redistricting be done by independent, non-partisan commissions in each state. District maps must be approved within a specified term after the national census, and must be done only once per decade.
Increase the number of Representatives in the Congress to better reflect the population. The current number of 435 was set in 1929.
Increase the salaries of Representatives and Senators and restrict their investment activity. Trading of securities should be banned.
Pass a Constitutional Amendment to create a fourth branch of the Federal government that would encompass independent regulatory agencies such as the SEC and the Federal Trade Commission. Officials of such agencies would be appointed and overseen by a joint committee of the House and Senate. They would not be part of the Executive Branch.
Reform the tax system. In the past, I have considered that a progressive value-added tax might be the best way to avoid the loopholes associated with the income tax. There have been a number of proposals along these lines that should be considered.
If the income tax is retained, raise rates on the upper brackets and purge as many exceptions (exemptions, credits, deductions) as possible from the tax code.
Universal healthcare, perhaps in the form of Medicare For All. Fund it by taxing all incomes.
Extend the Social Security income cutoff to fund its Trust Fund.
Consider a National Service Act that would obligate each citizen to do a year of service upon reaching the age of 18. This would include civilian activities (e.g., Peace Corps, Job Corps), as well as the military.
Pass an updated Voting Rights Act or Constitutional Amendments to ensure that every eligible citizen has the right to vote.
Reinvigorate antitrust enforcement.
One other change I think would dramatically reshape the political landscape is increasing the number of political parties. Tucker Carlson is talking about starting a new party, and that would divide the current Republican Party. On the Democratic side, the Democratic Socialists of America (not technically a political party) have won a number of House and state legislative seats, and elected Zorhan Momdani Mayor of New York City. The possibility of a four-party system is not unthinkable: the Left, Center Left, Center Right, and Right are increasingly distinct entities. The emergence of a coalition government in the House and Senate would be a reality. The duopoly of the two-party system would be eliminated, and the stranglehold of binary choices would be broken.
I intend to expound on these ideas in greater detail as we move towards the mid-term elections. There is more I can add, I am sure. If you have other reforms or changes you think are needed, please submit them in the Comments.
It’s July 4th, Independence Day. Think of it as a reaffirmation day, where we each can recommit to the ideals we have always believed the United States of America represented.
You can support my efforts here by becoming a paying subscriber for $5.00 per month. An annual subscription is $50.00 for 12 months.
If you don’t wish to become a regular subscriber, consider contributing occasionally by leaving a tip. Click below:
If you want to submit a piece for 168, please email me at nicrosato2@gmail.com.
And please remember to click the Like button.
As I have often pointed out, Richard Hofstadter’s Anti-Intellectualism in American Life (1963) remains the seminal work on the subject. It is still available.
“The Federalist is a collection of 85 articles and essays written by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay under the collective pseudonym Publius to promote the ratification of the Constitution of the United States. The papers themselves came to be known collectively as the Federalist Papers.” -Wikipedia
Although crime rates have been decreasing for decades, the U.S. ranks higher than most developed nations in homicides and leads the world in firearm deaths.
I use the term “democracy” here in the colloquial sense: The United States is more properly a “democratic republic”, a system in which the people choose their leaders. In a strict sense, in a pure democracy (such as the Athenian democracy of ancient Greece), all citizens participate in government decision-making; a town hall meeting of hundreds of millions of Americans is unimaginable.
The unitary executive theory is a constitutional law theory that asserts the President of the United States has sole authority over the executive branch, allowing for centralized control and the ability to remove executive officials without congressional approval. This theory has sparked significant debate regarding its implications for the separation of powers and potential risks of autocracy. You can find a more detailed explanation here.