I have observed how governments organize
societies in more than 125 countries around the planet, providing a myriad of
mixes from one end of the spectrum to the other on the public/private continuum.
By this I mean where one sees extreme
public on one side, where the government controls everything, to extreme
private on the other, where almost all goods and services are in the private
sector.
In this essay I am not providing an opinion
on one or the other. I will save that
for a later blog. Here I am merely
stating that the people should decide where their society sits on the spectrum. In other words I believe in democracy –
especially, and most importantly, at the local levels of geographic political
organization (city, district, state/province, etc.).
Democracy, however, is a fickle beast. At its best, democracy provides a Forum for
the debate of IDEAS on how to best organize societies. Members of Representative Bodies, such as a Parliament
or Congress, introduce concepts on how
to, for example, establish a mix on the continuum of private/public. Other members subsequently introduce risk
assessments, counterbalance with other options, introduce new concepts,
threats, etc and eventually votes are taken and the national or local regulatory
framework is adjusted in line with the new emerging paradigms on how to best manage
societies in line with the values of those societies.
This form of what I call “Tribal Democracy”
also emerges in the so-called mature democracies. In the United States, for example, one sees
many people voting Democrat or Republican simply because their parents were of
that party, or because they have chosen to join that particular tribe. We no longer have to think about the ideas
put forth by the representatives – all we have to do is vote “Republican” or “Democrat”
because we somehow feel our tribal representatives best represent our individual
interests, viewpoints and values.
The problem with this tendency is that we
stop listening and we fix our filters to ensure that only our preconceived
notions of “them” are reinforced. Selective perception only serves to reinforce
our stereotypes of the other. The
Democrats only hear from Republican “Fascists” how they will turn our society
into a coast-to-coast Wal-Mart and the Republicans only hear from the Democrat “Liberals”
how they will turn our society into a communist quagmire. The problem with this is that neither
tribe is correct – and both parties have good ideas.
In Tribal Democracies at both ends of the
spectrum (whether in new or mature democracies) we see families torn apart, societies
entrenched into separate camps, civil wars and friends unfriended – not because of different ideas being debated but because of an intransigent and
tenacious attachment to party identities. In other
words, "I am an X and I will publicly defend every idea and issue spewing forth
from X Party representatives because they
always have better ideas than the Y Party representatives."
The flip side of this way of thinking is that it leaves no room for Dialog – it simply Declares that everything the “other side” may propose is stupid, misguided or even evil.
“I cannot possibly agree with what the Y
representatives are saying because “they” are stupid, misguided and evil.”
Agree with what?
“I have no idea but they are Y so I will
not even waste my time listening to them.”
---
Sound familiar?
As an American I call on all my fellow
citizens to step back and reconsider their tenacious attachment to party
positions. Let’s stop this trend into
tribal conflict and get back to discussing ideas. Let’s listen to what ALL the representatives
on both sides of the aisle are saying and vote our conscience rather than our
tribe.
