To claim that jostling for the biggest share of federal power and largesse--in a word, greed--magically serves the common good is a convenient cover for an oligarchy masquerading as a "democracy."
Is a "democracy" that's for sale still a democracy, or is it something else? The question arises from the nature of our political system, whatever you wish to call it: it is an auction for political favors / influence in which the highest bidder wins--as in any auction.
"The will of the people" is a useful artifice. Those who collect the largest war chests of cash win elections because they buy visibility via marketing and adverts--just like selling detergent or "the latest innovation."
The belief at the bottom of this debased version of "democracy" is that everyone scrambling to maximize their own interests in a free-for-all of advocacy magically generates policies that serve the common good. In other words, if everyone jostling for power gets their slice of federal largesse, then that is identical to serving the common good.
But this is false: a state that is nothing more than a highest-bidder-wins distributor of subsidies and favors cannot possibly serve the common good, as the common good is not just the sum total of private interests.
President Jimmy Carter described this succinctly: "The national interest is not always the sum of our single or special interests. We must not forget that the common good is our common interest and our individual responsibility."
We have become accustomed to thinking of "democracy" as nothing more than self-interested hogs jostling at the feeding trough of federal favors and largesse. In an oligarchy masquerading as a "democracy," this distribution reflects 1) the need to avoid inequalities extreme enough to trigger revolt and 2) the need to cloak the fact that the vast majority of political influence is "owned" (bought and paid for) by the top 0.1%.
So the bottom 40% get their share of subsidies, the middle class gets its share of subsidies, the top 10% get their share of subsidies and then the top 0.1% retain the real power and wealth to serve their own interests.
In a functional democracy--as opposed to a hogs-at-the-trough auction of favors--the social order is an interconnected ecosystem of: 1) the social contract, 2) civic virtue, 3) shared purpose, 4) shared sacrifice, 5) moral legitimacy, 6) social trust, 7) membership, and 8) social cohesion, the glue that binds society in times of hardship or crisis. Absent social cohesion, society disintegrates.
The social contract is the set of implicit expectations and obligations people consider their birthright.
Civic virtues are the set of standards that serve both private interests and the common good: agency, accountability, integrity, transparency, civic duty, honor, and simplicity, which includes being disciplined, generous, forthright and frugal.
Shared purpose includes national purpose. Pursuing shared purpose demands sacrifice and the sublimation of private gain.
Shared sacrifice is the distribution of necessary sacrifices across the entire spectrum of the social order, from the highest to the humblest. To contribute is to be valued, and this is the core of social cohesion.
Moral legitimacy is akin to what the Chinese call the Mandate of Heaven: Heaven and Earth are bound in a moral universe, and when society's leaders forfeit civic virtues in favor of debauchery and private gain, moral legitimacy dissolves and the Mandate of Heaven is lost.
Social Trust is the sum of individuals' trust in institutions and fellow citizens to follow the social norms. When institutions fail to serve the populace by becoming sandboxes of privilege and self-service, social trust erodes.
Membership is the genetically coded glue of social cohesion. When our contribution is valued, we're valued, and contributing to shared interests qualifies us for membership. Having our membership revoked--being shunned or cast out--is a painful punishment.
Social cohesion is the sum of all these binding forces, the sense that contributing and belonging are worth the effort and sacrifice. If the lower classes are being sacrificed to maximize the private gains of the upper class, social cohesion is lost.
The debauched, debased system we inhabit is no longer able to serve common interests or the common good. It is a dysfunctional simulation of a true democracy which must directly serve common interests by sublimating private gain to the common good.
To claim that jostling for the biggest share of federal power and largesse--in a word, greed--magically serves the common good is a convenient cover for an oligarchy masquerading as a "democracy" because the peasants get to vote on which branch of the self-serving elites had the most effective ad campaign this time around.
This artifice eventually wears thin because the glorification of self-interest erodes social cohesion and moral legitimacy. The awakening from our greed-induced trance will be, well, as interesting as it is inevitable.
This essay was drawn from my book Investing In Revolution.
My book Investing In Revolution is available at a 10% discount ($18 for the paperback, $24 for the hardcover and $8.95 for the ebook edition).
Introduction (free)
Check out my updated Books and Films.
Become
a $3/month patron of my work via patreon.com
Subscribe to my Substack for free
NOTE: Contributions/subscriptions are acknowledged in the order received. Your name and email
remain confidential and will not be given to any other individual, company or agency.
|
Thank you, John K. ($100), for your outrageously generous subscription
to this site -- I am greatly honored by your steadfast support and readership.
|
|
Thank you, Laura D. ($70), for your marvelously generous subscription
to this site -- I am greatly honored by your steadfast support and readership.
|
|
Thank you, Angus L. ($70) for your superbly generous subscription
to this site -- I am greatly honored by your support and readership.
|
|
Thank you, Erich K. ($70) for your splendidly generous subscription
to this site -- I am greatly honored by your support and readership.
|
