DEMOCRACY’S IMPERFECTION

There are many reasons why America continues to prosper despite elections of inept political leaders.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

America’s Deadliest Election (The Cautionary Tale of the Most Violent Election in American History)

By: Dana Bash, David Fisher

Narrated By: Dana Bash

Dana Bash is an American journalist and news anchor for CNN. David Fisher is an accomplished author who has written twenty New York Times bestsellers.

“America’s Deadliest Election” reaches back to 1868 in Louisiana to tell the story of Henry C. Warmoth who was elected governor and later, a Congressional representative of Louisiana. Warmoth’s election in Louisiana reminds one of Donald Trump’s election in 2017. Warmoth manages to become the 23rd Governor of Louisiana in 1868. His election at the young age of 26 made him one of the youngest governors in U.S. history. Of course, age is not the reason one might compare Trump’s election to Warmoth’s, but it is Warmoth’s unrestrained rhetoric and purposeful lies that got him elected.

Henry C. Warmoth (1842-1931, died at age 89. He was the Reconstruction governor of Louisiana and later Louisian State Representative.)

In Louisiana a large unrepresented minority were black Americans. Warmoth’s term ended with allegations of corruption and dishonesty but his rhetoric for disenfranchised blacks gave him the governorship and later a position as Louisian State Representative in congress. His political career extended through 10 years of Civil War Reconstruction and corruption.

Depiction of a US Army Officer Meeting with African Americans in Louisiana after the Emancipation Proclamation.

As a wealthy American, Trump and many rich business leaders and industrialists believe lower taxes and less government regulation improves opportunity and raises the living standards of the poor. Many wealthy Americans believe John F. Kennedy’s 1963 line that “a rising tide lifts all boats”. History shows a different picture, i.e. with lower taxes, the rich got richer, the middle class remained middle class, and the poor increased. America is nearing the point where it will have its first trillionaires while this richest country in the world has an increasing number of poor and a burgeoning homeless crisis.

In modern times, Trump’s rhetoric disingenuously appeals to blue-collar workers but with an underlying appeal to the rich who believe in “trickle down” economics.

Freedom allows American citizens to lie as well as tell the truth. The problem with truth is “truth is in the eye of the beholder” or what Timothy Leary called a human’s “reality tunnel”. Warmoth and Trump had their own “reality tunnels” with the objective of getting them elected. Their objective is to gain power, money, or prestige. Both Warmoth and Trump are willing to lie to themselves and others to gain their objective.

In American democracy, freedom is the holy grail of its success.

As pointed out in “The Economist” earlier this week, Democracy is messy. Democracies like France, Great Britain, and the European Union are struggling to find their way in the 21st century. Representative government is difficult because voters cannot know if candidates for office are telling a follower only what they want to hear or if what is said is what the candidate believes. Additionally, voters cannot be sure an elected person is capable or willing to walk the talk after their election.

Recent Presidential elections in America before Biden replaces Trump.

Many Blacks had never been able to vote but Warmoth (a former Union Civil War’ veteran) became instrumental in supporting the 15th amendment that prohibited states from denying the vote based on race, color, or previous condition of servitude. For the first time in America, Blacks could vote. Naturally, Blacks voted for Warmoth despite his reputation for corruption. However, Warmoth’s support and actions create a split between his Republican followers and slavery proponent Democrats that remind listeners of today’s political party intransigence.

An irony of the story of Governor Warmoth is that he is clearly a scofflaw, but his lawlessness helped bring black Americans into the electoral process.

Warmoth was a criminal. He speculated in state bond and treasury notes which were a conflict of interest for a governor. He profited from a partnership given by a newspaper that had a contract for state printing. Warmoth created what was called the “State Returning Board” that had the authority to discard legitimate votes to keep Louisiana Republicans in power. One might suggest President Trump had similar conflicts of interest.

The authors explain what made Warmoth a crook. It was for the reward of money and power.

Inept and unethical practices are mitigated by the foresight of the framers of the Constitution. The acts of legislators since the beginning of America’s creation have bent the arc of history toward freedom and equality. Balance of power between branches of government, election of honest and ethical leaders, media that exposes political rhetoric for its understanding of truth and lies have helped Americans to live free and prosper. America is blessed with natural resources that have made America become a great Democratic success.

There are many reasons why American Democracy continues to prosper despite elections of inept and unethical political leaders.

The last chapters of Bash’s and Fisher’s book show what can happen when there is a sharp split between Democrats and Republicans that roils the American democratic process. What this history shows is that we have been at this crossroad before, and America pulled itself together. Warmoth was not the ideal representative of American Democracy, but he played a part in history that began the movement for Black freedom in the South and their right to vote.

Trump reminds one of Warmoth’s history. One hopes the split between political parties will be mended by the election of a President that can heal the vituperative factionalism of the Democratic and Republican parties in 2025.

AMERICA’S DECISION

It is up to Americans to vote or not vote. The choice today is between two old men. American Democracy will not fail because of either man’s election.

America’s Presidential debate on June 27th, 2024, was a painful reminder of advancing age. Whether to choose Donald Trump or Joseph Biden to be the next President of the United States is a “Hobson’s Choice”. Americans are compelled to vote for one of these two men or stay home and do nothing. Doing nothing means other Americans will decide who will represent Democracy to the world for the next four years.

Getting old is a mixed blessing. On the one hand, living long may offer wisdom, experience, and relationship connections. On the other, living long engenders health issues, physical frailty, and diminished mental acuity. Underlying these mixed blessings are the way a person has lived their life, the decisions they have made, the way they have treated others, and the inner moral compass they have followed.

It is up to Americans to vote or not vote for a President of the United States. The choice today is between two old men. Either will have the help of the three branches of the American government to do their job. American Democracy will not fail because of either man’s election to the office of President of the United States.

THE MARSHALL PLAN

NATO is not an American Marshall Plan but a bulwark for nation-state self-determination.

Books of Interest
 Website: chetyarbrough.blog

“The Marshall Plan” (Dawn of the Cold War)

By: Benn Steil

Narrated by: Arthur Morey

Benn Steil (Author, American economist, senior fellow and director of international economics at the Council on Foreign Relations.)

Along with an excellent history of America’s “…Marshall Plan”, there is an underlying message about two fundamental forms of government, i.e., one is democratic, and the other is authoritarian. By democratic, the point is not to suggest an idyllic understanding of American Democracy or Russian Authoritarianism. America and Russia have experienced government leadership that has been both authoritarian and democratic in the last 248 years.

One can justifiably argue America’s authoritarianism was experienced during the four years of the Trump administration (2017-2021).

In contrast Russia’s democratic experience was with Mikhail Gorbachev between 1985 and 1991. Before and after Gorbachev, democratic experience in Russia has been limited and largely authoritarian. What history of “The Marshall Plan” shows is the superior value of American democracy’s checks and balances that limit the power of authoritarian leadership by preserving deliberations of the many as opposed to the one. Trump is not the first U.S. President that was an authoritarian.

George Catlett Marshall Jr. (1880-1959, American army officer and statesman, became Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense during the Truman administration.)

History of “The Marshall Plan” shows the resilience of democratic versus authoritarian governance. Steil shows “The Marshall Plan” is created in a boiling cauldron of disagreement among branches of the American government. The conflicts between American political parties and departments of government hammered out a plan that improved the economies of both America and Europe after the war. America became the economic hegemon of the world as Russia’s economy collapsed in the early 60s.

One might argue the success of China came as a result of the more inclusive economic decision-making policies of Deng Xiaoping after Mao Zedong’s death. With Deng’s opening the economy to market-oriented reforms in 1978, worker efficiency and productivity created an economic boom in China. China’s danger today is the autocratic rule of Xi Jinping. His one-man rule nearly collapsed the economy during Covid 19. America certainly suffered from Covid, but Trump’s authoritarian character was mitigated by political resistance to unilateral Presidential decision-making.

Steil explains how Molotov delayed negotiations on “The Marshall Plan” with a clear understanding that only one person, Joseph Stalin, made decisions in Russia.

Steil notes “The Marshall Plan” is singularly disparaged and reviled by the Russian government. That disparagement is directed by one person, Joseph Stalin. There is no one to oppose the autocratic rule of Stalin’s leadership. Stalin’s opposition was either sent to the Gulag or murdered. A more balanced power structure in Russia could have taken advantage of “The Marshall Plan” but by singular fiat of one person (Stalin) implementation was impeded after WWII. The errors inherent in communism and authoritarian rule are being recreated by Putin in the 21st century.

What Steil shows is that many elected officials in America fought the principles of “The Marshall Plan”. However, the constant back and forth of government policy arguments in Congress aided European recovery after the war in a way that stabilized Europe and monumentally improved the economic growth of America.

Autocracies can certainly improve their economic growth at a pace that is superior to governments ruled by democratic ideals. However, autocracies have a much greater risk of following the wrong path because of their singular focus on one person’s decisions.

With an autocrat’s decision-making process, economic growth is either stultified or accelerated by one person’s decision. The give and take of democracies offer the benefit of different policy maker’s perspectives that may slow policy decisions but ultimately improve the odds of forward economic growth.

However, it is more than the availability of natural resources that made America economically successful. It is the give and take of a democratic process that protects America from the giant missteps that can come from autocratic rule. America has had some good to great rulers, but it has also had some ignorant, bigoted autocrats that offered minimal support for the ideals of freedom and equality. Checks and balances are the strength of American democracy. Presidents can make a difference, but they cannot destroy America’s future.

Ben Steil’s history of “The Marshall Plan” is not limited to an explanation of how important and difficult it is for America to pass important and consequential legislation.

The last chapters of Steil’s history of the Marshall Plan explains why Russia, China, and North Korea resent American encroachment on their spheres of influence. From the era of Stalin, Mao, and Kim Jong II, there has been a growing concern over the expansion of America’s sphere of influence. Steil explains how the Marshall Plan has morphed into a deepening concern about NATO expansion in Europe. As noted in an earlier, the Marshall Plan is created to aid recovery of countries that were impacted by WWII’s destruction. In reality it aided America to become the hegemon of the world. Because of the economic stimulus that revived the countries damaged by WWII, America created new markets for their industrial growth and international trade.

NATO is viewed as another vehicle for America’s economic growth and ideological threat to Putin, Xi, and Kim Jong Un’s control of their countries.

NATO is viewed as another invidious way for America to expand their influence and power. That seems an unfair evaluation of NATO. NATO is a military defense plan saying one country within NATO that is attacked by another country is an attack on all NATO countries. Every nation that has managed to become an independent country should be able to pursue there own interests.

The iron curtain is rusting but its characteristic strength remains a barrier to international cooperation.

The rusting of the iron curtain comes from the tears of societies ruled by authoritarians. The authoritarians are leaders who believe their way of life is threatened. NATO is viewed as a trojan horse at the front gates of non-aligned countries.

One decries Putin’s slaughter of Ukrainians in an unjust war. Life of innocents have no value to today’s Russian leadership that believes their power and way of life is threatened.

The real-politic of authoritarian’s desire for stability and power outweigh the value of human life. The same is seen in the plight of Palestinians who are not part of the October 7th’ terrorists’ killings and kidnappings but are in the way of Israel’s retaliation against Hamas.

In my amateur opinion, China, Russia, North Korean, or other authoritarian governments have a right to rule their countries as they wish. Their citizens are the key to every leader’s longevity. NATO is an effort to offer freedom of choice to established independent countries but if the citizens of a country support their leaders, there is little NATO, or any alliance can do, except to support the sovereignty of all nations.

NATO is not an American Marshall Plan but a bulwark for nation-state self-determination.

Steil argues George Kennan is right in suggesting NATO expansion would be “the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-Cold War era”. Kennan believed it would inflame nationalist beliefs and reinvigorate the Cold War. And so, it has–as evidenced by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, China’s expressed intention and action toward Taiwan, and North Korea’s armaments support of Russia.