Once again anti-representative democracy forces are
clamoring for the institutions of government to do
things “our way or no way at all.” We observe this
impulse arising not only in militant, often violent, protest
groups, but also from elected officials who risk either
defeat by voters or their extreme policies rejected by
independentpublic institutions they do not control.
In the case of the protest groups, many of which are
mostly populated by naive students organized by
professional radicals and groups, the most disturbing
aspect has been the feckless response of many university
officials when the protests became violent or coercive.
Interestingly, in most cases the protest gtoups’ extremis
activities have provoked a negative backlash in the
communities outside the campaus or wherever they
take place.
The totalitarian impulse employed by extremist forces on
both the left an right adopt historic ideologies and
sloganeering of dictatorships, communism, fascism,
socialism or anarchism to impose themselves on everyone
without popular consent.
The extremist groups have always been with us, but their
radical or reactionary policies rarely succeed in a
majoritarian society.
When supposedly more moderate figures in
representative democracies resort to this tactic, however,
it is much more disturbing and unwelcome.
Recent examples include the dysfunction in the U.S.
House of Representatives where a small faction of the
majority Republican Party stymied action of its own
party and leadership in conducting the orderly process
of legislation. This minority resisted any reasonable
compromise on certain issues, and disrupted the
legislative process for much of the recent term.
On the other side, individual Democrats in the Congrress
are proposing “packing” the U.S. Supreme Court with
additional members who would then outnumber the
current majority and produce decisions that they favor.
The Supreme Court was created as an independent
third branch of the U.S, government. Members of the
Court are appointed by the president and confirmed by
the U.S. Senate. Their decisions thus reflect indirectly
the contemporary views of the voters. Some Courts
are therefore more liberal or conservative, but this
changes over time as older justices are replaced with
newer ones. The original Court was established in the
Constitution and initially had six members, but
the present number of nine was settled in 1869.
The most notable past attempt to “pack” the Court
occurred in the 1930’s when President Franklin
Roosevelt, a Democrat at the height of his national
popularity, became frustrated by a conservative
Court which struck down some of his legislative
proposals. But even though his party controlled the
Congress and he was so personally popular, the idea
of “packing” the Court was considered tampering with
the principle of three independent branches of the
government, and was rejected.
These are only two examples of several all-or-nothing
ideas being expressed today by politicians who should
be more respectful of the unique constitutional balance
which has enabled our representative democracy to
evolve, thrive and endure, as it has for more than 230
years, and remains a model for the free world.
_______________________________________________
Copyright (c) 2024 by Barry Casselman. All rightd reserved.