As listeners of this show have no doubt noticed, there are no shortage of articles these days about how democracy is doomed in 2022 and/or 2024. Michael Berkman, Chris Beem and Candis Watts Smith discuss them this week and work through how much weight to give the doomsayers and how to take antidemocratic forces seriously without falling too far into despair.
We also touch on what's happened in schools and at school board meetings over the past year, and what these developments mean for long-held theories about the power and stability of local government. Finally, we discuss the University of Austin, which is led by several former guests of this show, and whether it will really solve the problems it hopes to.
Thank you to everyone who's listened to and supported the show over the past year. We are taking a few weeks off and will be back with new episodes in January.
Episode Transcript
Michael Berkman
From the McCourtney Institute for Democracy at Penn State University. I'm Michael Berkman.
Chris Beem
I'm Chris Beem.
Candis Watts Smith
I'm Candis Watts Smith.
Jenna Spinelle
I'm Jenna Spinelle, and welcome to Democracy Works, the season finale, year end wrap up for 2021. We have everybody here together. And we're just going to, I think, look back at some of the things that we've talked about and seen in democracy news over the past year, and maybe take a look ahead at some of where we might be going. And this is all sort of framed around, you know, we're not that far from the one year anniversary of the capital insurrection on January 6, then, it seems to me that, you know, a lot of the discussion right now, in the media, as you know, was January 6, what we saw that day, just a test run for what we are going to see in 2022 2024, and beyond as far as attacks on democracy and the institutions that comprise it. So I thought that that might be a good place for us to start, you know, what do you all think, is what we saw on January 6, an exception or an anomaly? Or is it more the way that politics and democracy will operate moving forward,
Michael Berkman
I guess we can kind of divide January six into some of its contingent parts. Okay. So on the one hand, you have the big lie, the effort to subvert the popular election results, that is an ongoing thing. The second you had the sort of violence that was committed there, we know by a broad cross section of Americans, and whether or not we're heading into a period of political violence. And there, I have to say, I have a lot of concerns.
Chris Beem
Personally, I would say yes, and no. I mean, on the one hand, I don't think that the we're going to see a repeat of the insurrection, or at least I'm not confident that that's going to happen. But I do think there is has been a concerted effort at subversion of democratic norms and practices. But it's been at the institutional level. And so the end result is the same. But the effort now is more systematic and institutional. And the one thing that kind of kept us in on the Democratic side of the ledger, after January 6, were those same institutions, secretaries of state legislators, governors, and judges. And there has been an effort to undermine, though that last kind of buttress to democratic society.
Candis Watts Smith
So I think that it's also important for us to figure out exactly what the goal of January six was, and there were many different kinds of people there. I was listening to an interview with I was listening to an interview with Kathleen Belew, I think, is her name. And, you know, one of the things that she brought up is that this kind of attack was depicted, and like a white supremacists, like, piece of fiction, and served as like, so like, for many people, it was a recruitment strategy into these kinds of movements. So from that, like, you know, again, going back to Michael mentioned, it gets component parts, like that's one part. And then there is the response, both short term and long term. To your point, Chris, about, yeah, there were plenty of Republican state election officials who ensure that the vote was, you know, counted as it should have been. And then, so that was short term. And so, you know, we got President Biden and all the things, you know, and also, you know, Mike Pence did what he was supposed to do his job. But then we have the long term part in this like pass year of just watching people willing to provide legitimacy to the claims of people who were at January 6, and to continue to undermine the legitimacy of election. So I, you know, I think you're right, there's a lot of maybe not thinking about what January 6, exactly was, but maybe just kind of reflecting on its short and long term impacts tells us maybe some signs of where we're heading in different parts of our society and our governance.
Michael Berkman
And in many ways, Donald Trump will be in a much stronger position to subvert the results of the election in 2024, than he was in 2020. And I suspect people don't realize that because they think, Well, he was the president, he had all the powers. But actually, the executive branch has very few powers. When it comes to elections. The powers lie in the state legislature is a lie with state election officials, and they lie with the Congress. And 2024, you may well have Republican Congress in both houses and 2020. It was split. We know that they have gone after many of the election officials and public officials who, who did the right thing in 2020. And they have been replaced by people who are you know, just personally loyal to Donald Trump. I think 2024 is shaping up to be very scary. And I know there is an article in The Atlantic that's getting a lot of play right now that I would refer people to I'm sure general put in the show notes. Because it really does lay this out. And it's it's pretty frightening stuff.
Candis Watts Smith
Well, you know, for me, what, you know, there is basically a cottage industry of doom stay riding around, you know, are we at the end of democracy,
Chris Beem
I'm a charter member, by the way. I have my ID card.
Candis Watts Smith
We can pick apart, you know, we can look at each of the components of these arguments. But what pisses me off is that the Democrats and Congress are not doing anything about this. And also that Joe Biden lackadaisical about all of this.
Michael Berkman
And you know, what he says this, because he described it as the worst, as the biggest threat to democracy since the Civil War, is how he has described it, but then the actions don't seem to match it.
Candis Watts Smith
Riddle me that a friend of mine called me and she said, I don't know why I don't just vote for the third party. Because neither, you know, neither major party is doing anything helpful. And I she says, You know, I know that what you're going to do is try to get me, you're going to try to use fear, to say, I shouldn't vote, I should vote for the safe guy in order to not get the really scary guy. But is that a good enough motivation to persuade my friend and other people like her that the Democrats are going to help that the Republican? You know what I mean, like we have these two major parties. And under both of them, we have a lot of suffering, and very little democratic backsliding. So what do we make of this?
Chris Beem
I wouldn't go that far. I think one I mean, you know, I think the argument that the Biden ministration would make is that it's the economy stupid, and then for, therefore, you deal with the economy. And that's how you make the best case for reelection, whether or not that's right or wrong. I think that's the argument they would make. But the other thing is that I mean, there is one party that is run by Democrats, small d, there's one party that is run by, if not anti Democrats, at least, you know, not strong supporters of democracy. And no matter what you want, no matter what your policy objectives are, without a democratic process, you're not going to get them. And so for the, for until this until this change changes until it proves to be otherwise, the best way to achieve any policy ends is to vote for the party that supports democracy. And, you know, in terms of that basic criteria, I don't think there's much I mean, there's much question that yeah, not the same.
Michael Berkman
And I also think that as important, as he thought, as he argued, the state of democracy was, I think, as a, you know, institutionalist through his core, he was far more concerned about the institution of the Justice Department than in using the Justice Department, which really is the only tool he's got, if using the Justice Department to address these issues of democracy. So he appointed somebody who is an institutionalist and can help to, perhaps rebuild the integrity of the Justice Department. But in terms of leaving In the political fight to preserve democracy, I think Merrick Garland is just very weak.
Chris Beem
And it certainly appears that way.
Michael Berkman
On this general question, you know, if we take a step back, I think there's something else that's going on. And you know, Kansas is, right. There is this cottage industry that's developed about, you know, these sort of rules and scenarios that could all go wrong. But I think more troubling, is just the continued erosion of support for democracy among the American public. And that is another consequence of what's going on here. Americans trust in American institutions and democracy in elections, in any of that is just eroding day by day. And it's been an intentional strategy, it is incredibly effective. And I in any democracy scholar is going to tell you that public support for democracy is essential. Because once the public withdraws its support for democracy as a way of governing, then democracy is, is at serious risk.
Jenna Spinelle
So this to me gets back a little bit to the question I've been thinking about, as I read some of these Doom type of articles is how do you know how much how much stock? Should we put in them? How Not how seriously, should we take them, but just how much should we be paying attention to this?
Candis Watts Smith
So for me, I think that some of these pieces are helpful. And I think that they're helpful insofar as they point out that democracy is fragile. And we can't be too sure of ourselves that America is especially insulated from Democratic backsliding. I think that generally speaking Americans, you know, believe that, you know, it's gonna be the Republic forever, and that we're always gonna have this thing called democracy. And the fact of the matter is, is that, you know, democratic processes and input you know, democratization is not a linear process, and we could go backwards. But to your point, Jenna, then the question is, okay, well, then what are we going to do about it? There are things that people can do. And now I'm going to go back on my own self and just be like, but the way that our institutions are set up right now makes doing something about it actually quite difficult. Impossible. No. But difficult. Yes, yeah,
Michael Berkman
I kind of feel presidential elections, a good place to see it, that we're kind of increasingly running up against an American public that I think increasingly actually expects sort of democracy and participation, because that has been the general progression of the country, you know, being governed by a constitution designed for a relatively undemocratic time. And the stuff around the presidential elections is the best place to see it. You know, there's, there's nothing in the Constitution that gives the public the power over electing who the president is. And so all of these machinations that are going on are actually very well situated within the Constitution, although not really within the political culture of the time. And so it is actually possible that a state legislature could just say, we're not going to listen to the election results, we're going to send the electors that we want constitutionally they can do that. Now that violates, like every Democratic norm, we've come to accept every guardrail that's been built up. But, you know, we've witnessed over the last four or five, six years just a continual eroding of these guardrails and norms. And frankly, it was only a couple of people around the country, maybe more than a couple, a handful of people that prevented some of this stuff from happening. So it's, it is all very realistic. And it's realistic, because the Constitution really is not designed to preserve, I think, the democracy that people want. And I think actually, that might be part of what's embedded in and I know it because it comes up on the mood of the nation poll, and we think about it a lot about this where people who often respond to us we're a republic, not a democracy. And I think that's kind of a going back to the Constitution and say, you know, we're not attended to beat democratic, but it's a democratic age, and people do expect to have a say,
Chris Beem
I mean, so I'm reluctant to say that I think there's this organized Cabal, anti democratic Cabal, but I think there's this organized democratic Cabal. And it's not just on the part of elites in the United States, but it's also Russia and China, and other actors, Orban in Hungary, who see it as their task to undermine popular support for democracy and What they do, what these international players do is point to what's going on in the United States right now and say, See, this doesn't work. It's hopelessly conflicted, they don't get things done. They're not serving the populace. And if you really want to have a society in which your children are going to be better off than you are, and where the streets are safe, and every, you know, whatever else you want, then democracy is not for you.
Jenna Spinelle
So, you know, the point about this kind of anti democratic takeover, you know, organization, we've been talking about it thus far at the national level. But I think, as we also know, and I've seen over the past year, it's filtered down to the local level, and seems like school boards in particular, are, you know, a hotbed for this right now, then we've talked about this sort of in passing on the show this season, but not really at length. And so I'm just wondering what, you know, what you all make of this? Is this, just a localization of what is happening nationally? Is this something unique? or different? Is this perhaps, and are local governments better positioned to deal with these types of things? Or are they not as well positioned? And you know, how are you thinking about these types of things
Michael Berkman
So I have two thoughts about the school board's that really kind of concerned me right now. One is, they're what they reflect about this culture, about a sort of culture of violence that I think is increasingly dominating our politics, and maybe not by a majority of people, but a pretty powerful minority. And I mean, have we seen so much sort of, I don't know how one would perfectly assess. But it feels like the Klan days in the sense of just sort of a culture of accepted political violence in pursuit of one political side. And we're seeing that now, you know, there are all these stories of the school board members that are being receiving death threats, or having to quit this type of thing. And so there's no doubt that we're seeing that kind of filtering down of this sort of culture and acceptance of violence. The other thing about it, though, is and this is not new, I mean, a very good political scientist, Daniel Hopkins has written about this, that American politics is becoming increasingly nationalize, that local politics are more and more like national politics are, and how depressing, because, you know, on this show as one place as we try to do through our Nevins Fellows Program at the McCourtney Institute, we often think about local politics as the place where you maybe can go to get away from this intense participation, from the intense negative partisanship and maybe to be able to participate in politics, yet. I mean, my sense from what's going on at the school boards right now, his people are pulling out, because they really don't see local politics that way. These days?
Chris Beem
Well, and it's just not worth it. Right. I mean, well, if these people may, you know, they most of these positions are volunteer, and they're getting death threats. And, you know, just getting yelled at and having these meetings turn into, you know, free for alls. And, you know, I mean, I, you know, there's, there's this argument in, you know, among political scientists and others that, you know, look, this is not supposed to be there's something agonistic there's something antagonistic at the core of American politics, and politicians operate according to self interest. And it's forever thus, and you can't have high expectations. But you know, when this is new and different, we didn't when it is only in the last two or three years that we ever had to duct tape people to chairs, or to seats in airplanes, because of their behavior, that that didn't happen before. We didn't have people getting death threats at school boards, even when we were in the midst of issues around white flight or, you know, gay teachers or whatever, you didn't hear death threats. So I just I just want to insist that as the culture has changed, and be we should try to change it back.
Candis Watts Smith
So aside from the fact that we see that good people are opting out of good sensible thinking insightful people are opting out of local politics, that we see an a propensity for violence increasing, that we see, you know, the underbelly of like this individualism and lack of communitarianism. Like why would it I mean, aside from let's say, you need your child to not wear a mask for you know, maybe you know, for special, like, you know, for their education, you know what I mean? Like they need special accommodations, most other kids are perfectly fine, and they're healthy. You know, right. So like the fact that you're willing to forego the health of other kids for whatever reason, the one thing that really is really, what really intrigues me about this is that the issues that are coming up at the school boards are almost like manufactured, and that they are definitely adroitly manufactured by conservatives and Republicans in ways that Democrats just for what and just like can't get themselves together to create similar narratives that help people, you know, understand what's going on, and actually, and maybe even in a more accurate way. But I just find it fascinating how people are clinging on to this debate around critical race theory, or that they're clinging on to this debate around COVID. And anti science. It just boggles my mind, that Democrats in particular haven't found a way to bring a series of issues that are similarly important to not just to Democrats, but to Americans in a way that they would want to rally, not necessarily with violence, but in a way that it says like, there's something at stake here, and we need to be fighting for it. And in our case, like, it's democracy, its inclusion, it's, you know, making sure that people get the things that they need to make sure that our institutions are running well. Where's the narrative? Where's the soundbite? Where's the I'm underwhelmed by what what's going on on the left.
Michael Berkman
But I also think that they really fail to understand and appreciate the utter frustration that people are experiencing now, in particular, many parents, and how that frustration can be weaponized by you know, smart people with, you know, with divisive issues around a whole bunch of others. And the New York Times on their daily podcast did an excellent job, over about an hour and a half, looking at the school board elections in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. And what they were showing with, first of all, how centralized this all was in the school board elections, it speaks back to the nationalization there was national money, there was state money that was being spent across Republican candidates around the state. And there was a lot of education going off of the candidates as well about how to use parents frustration with the mask of the fact that the kids haven't been at school, you know, just with everything that's gone on over the last couple of years, and then sort of turn them into critical race theory, which they were open to anyway, and a range of other kinds of issues that we heard about during the school board elections. But I mean, at root, I wonder if Democrats appreciate the frustration or know how to speak to the frustration that many people were feeling as they came into this election year, especially focused at the schools. Whereas for parents, I hear I just have heard all kinds of frustration over the last couple of years.
Chris Beem
There was one of the guys, I think one of the school board members in that Bucks County thing on the daily, which I agree is really excellent says to the audience, COVID broke you. And you know, and I think that's part of it. I also think that from the former president from President Trump, there was this narrative, that if you are a patriot, if you love your country, then violence, hatred, attack is not only justified, it's incumbent upon you. That is how a true patriot behaves in this environment. And once that becomes the norm, then it's completely reasonable to expect that that's going to happen. And I don't even think it's necessarily only happened on the on the right, I think there's elements on the left that are doing the same kind of behavior where it used to be there were strict bounds around what was acceptable public discourse, those bounds have been eroded. And I think, you know, you have to say that, that Donald, a lot of the blame for that has to go at the feet of Donald Trump, at least for me.
Michael Berkman
And you know, another place I think you see it that we haven't really mentioned here that I think is also relevant. Kansas kind of brought this up obliquely a little bit before is this increases sort of vigilantism that we're seeing around the country as well. I mean, to me that was so just remarkable about the Texas abortion law was the way in which essentially deputized citizens to report one another. I mean, that is that is about as powerfully authoritarian as you can get. And of course, the murder in Georgia that was vigilantism as well. And there are examples all around of this sort of increased sense of vigilantism. But then there's also this mechanism, which up to now the courts have accepted, which feels like a very frightening sort of development to move towards this kind of vigilantism. Especially in an age when not only everybody has so many guns, but where it's very clear that the Supreme Court is, in the process through a series of decisions, we're gonna see another one very soon, of elevating Second Amendment rights above probably every other right that we have.
Jenna Spinelle
So you know, the other place that some of these same issues, but not all play out, or maybe like another big conversation, and we could talk about how much of this is manufactured or not, is the whole discussion about viewpoint, diversity on campus and free speech on campus. And these sorts of things. I know we had Jonathan Rauch on the show earlier this fall, this is something that he is deeply concerned about. He along with Andrew Sullivan, and some other previous guests of the show are now in what's that? Jonathan Haidt Yes, Jonathan Haidt as well. They are all involved in some way in this new University of Austin, which is intended, I think in their mind to push back against them some of what they see as this stifling of opinion and these types of things at other universities. And given that we are all university folks ourselves wondering what you all make of this, and maybe what it says about these broader issues about free speech and the like.
Chris Beem
You know, I mean, there are people the fact that there are people on that faculty Board, who I greatly admire, as scholars, as thinkers, you know, as public intellectuals, and I have an issue with the fact that we're going to be, you know, we're going to have this free exchange of ideas. And then they get a list of people who are all very similar in terms of their points of view, you know, and so well, what is that, but just a different version of what it is you're complaining about. However, I would also say that, you know, there's nothing wrong with creating your own model for education. And, you know, there's nothing wrong with leaving it to the marketplace of ideas. If it turns out that they can sustain this and can create a vibrant, meaningful, free intellectual experience. I don't see why anybody else should be all that bent out of shape.
Candis Watts Smith
I do not think that people should be bent out of shape at the founding of the University of Austin. I think it's important for us to keep in mind some of the things that they are, what their beef is. So Pano Kanelos said something like our democracy is faltering, in significant part, because our educational system has become illiberal, and is producing citizens and leaders who are incapable and unwilling to participate in the core activity of democratic governance. And yet, we just had a whole conversation about why people, there's a couple of things. One, there are people who would want to participate in democratic governance, but are being shouted down. The second thing is, is that the issues that we have in you know, producing citizens and leaders who are capable of participating, and being informed citizens doesn't start in college, it starts long before that. And I can't imagine that, you know, there's a, you know, we have a problem with public education in this country. So like, the problem to me does not start with people not being able to exchange ideas at college, but instead starts with trying to teach American kids, you know, the values of democracy and the values of compromise and sharing opinions and being informed, etc. The second or guess third thing that I guess the other thing that comes up is like, you know, while students are boycotting controversial guest speakers and their desert, you know, they're like, I'm demanding the resignation of faculty members with polarizing opinions. But my thing is, is like one, that's what students are supposed to do, right? They're just supposed to complain and boycott all of the time. So what the thing is, is that tenure protects you, protects you. But then we have places that are trying to either strip tenure away, prevent people from becoming tenure track, or like, you know, really just like punishing people from the Board of Trustees down. So like, this is these issues are not like something that you know, you or me, you know, Michael or Chris or Jenna or me do in our classrooms. These are problems that are happening well before students get to us. And they're happening from the Board of Trustees down.
Michael Berkman
But I think the real problem that we're not talking about is increasing political control of public universities from state legislatures. Yes. And to me, this is a far more illiberal problem, then, you know, some highly publicized and to me still on teaching on a large university campus, pretty isolated, right? I mean, I just do not experience in my life at Penn State campus, you know, repeated acts of liberalism that are shutting people down, I just, it just doesn't really seem to happen. There probably there are some valid points that are made about viewpoint diversity among faculty that I think has a lot more to do with selection than any self sure than anything else. But you know, what's going on out of the state legislatures, where, for example, in certain states, now professors aren't allowed to discuss certain kinds of race issues, and aren't allowed to discuss other kinds of issues are being told what it is that they have to do? I think this is really much more serious kind of problem and more threatening. And I think, in particular, that we're seeing, you know, boards of trustees that are increasingly politicized and tied into their legislatures, I see them increasingly appointing presidents that are reflecting this. So that those are the some of the developments in higher education that concern me more than than this.
Chris Beem
But I would put that at Trump's feet as well. I mean, you know, we all can articulate the, you know, they are serious, intellectual traditions that are deeply conservative, and that they have every right to be part of a conversation in a, you know, in any kind of setting of higher education. But, you know, when you argue that anybody who is an expert, or Elite is automatically not on the level is automatically out to undermine your position, then yeah, then that's what's going to happen is that those people are a not going to have any confidence in what goes on in higher education, and be aren't going to send their children there. Right. And so, yeah, that that is happening, but we should not therefore, you know, we should still be reading Edmund Burke, I guess, is what? You know. And and I just it, it concerns me that in the Republican Party right now, the one subsumes the other.
Candis Watts Smith
Well, I mean, I guess in the end, the University of Austin Austin University thought about that. Well, like Well, we'll see if it works. I mean, they care about market based solutions and their product cost $30,000. So we'll see where there we'll see. Yeah.
Jenna Spinelle
Yeah. Well, I think we need to start to bring this in for a close here, anything else that you'd like to leave our listeners with any final thoughts,
Chris Beem
I find the whole I find it difficult sometimes to fight this inclination to despair. And I don't want to discount that because I got a feeling that just about everybody is feeling that at some point, and I don't just mean democracy. I also mean, that there just seems to be these walls between us that are almost unbridgeable epistemological walls, walls about facts walls about what we both genuinely value, and I don't know how to get past that. Except that I come back to you know, something, Candace, you said, which is that, you know, this is part of what you sign up for, and nothing changes without you insisting on or committing yourself to change. And, and so I just, I feel like, you know, maybe over the holidays, we can talk a lot about what's the right kind of intervention, but if we all just start by, you know, using the house is an opportunity to be more generous to each other. Maybe that's not a bad place to start.
Candis Watts Smith
Yeah, I mean, I guess you have to practice, right? I guess, I mean, maybe put it this way. These are skills that you have to practice, it is difficult to want to make room for opposition, it is difficult to want to compromise, it is difficult to want to give up something for the, you know, for the greater good for many people. And yeah, maybe this is a low stakes way of practicing these skills in the holiday season.
Jenna Spinelle
You know, to zoom out, I think that one of the things I agree with you that, you know, these things are, do take practice. And it's easy, I think just to passively consume a lot of this stuff, whether it's reading articles, or listening to podcasts, or you know, all the rest of it without actually putting, you're taking action on the things you hear or putting into practice the things you're hearing.
Candis Watts Smith
And this is why I think that it's important for us to at least have a direction to go. What we are doing a lot of is saying like which direction we don't want to go in. And it's unclear about where we're trying to head and what steps we have to orient ourselves in some direction, and work toward that way, what the democracy doomsayers are doing is telling us, here's all of the things that will happen if we don't do anything, if we just keep going on this path. And so that means that we can take another path, but we'd have to kind of figure out what what that direction is going to be, what the orientation is going to be. And then what that first step is going to be.
Michael Berkman
I mean, as a student of party systems over the years, you know, right party systems are pretty stagnant things that stick around for a while, and then can eventually change. But it takes pretty dramatic events to make them change. And I feel like we're stuck in a sort of polarized party system along certain kinds of lines. That is very destructive to our politics. But it didn't just pop up with Donald Trump. It's been developing for 60 years. And I know Chris, and I go back and forth on this and having multiple podcasts over the over the last year. You know, is it the responsibility that just people behave better? Or is there something kind of fundamental that has to change in our politics and the party system and the kinds of issues, whatever that is going to be necessary before we really see some kind of change. And I kind of fear that it's the latter, that we need a new party system.
Candis Watts Smith
There are moments in American history where five years prior, we would have never thought that that thing was going to happen. Excellent point, Kansas.
Michael Berkman
Thank you.
Candis Watts Smith
It could happen again.
Michael Berkman
I think we can end the show this year. But I'd like to end by thanking Jenna for just great job leading the show over the year. It's harder with three of us and it was with two of us. And it's harder even still when one of us doesn't even live here anymore. Great guests Jenna in this virtual environment. And so thank you
Chris Beem
Yeah, I totally agree with that. Oh, my gosh, we all totally agree.
Jenna Spinelle
Well, thank you to all of you. Thank you to everybody, our loyal listeners and folks we've added this year thank you to our partners at WP su for all of their help and support. And if there are topics you want us to talk more about and suggestions you have for guests, please get in touch with us. We'd love to hear them as we start to plan the show for next year. We're going to take a couple weeks off but we'll be back in January. So for the entire team Michael Berkman, Beem, and Candis Watts Smith. I'm Jenna Spinelle. Thank you for listening Happy Holidays.