Under-Promise and Over-Deliver to Restore Trust in Our Democracy

Restoring Trust in Our Democracy

We can restore our democracy, but to do that, we will have to restore our people’s trust in our system of government, and that will not be easy. Voters don’t believe the promises that politicians make during elections. So, promises will not help. We will have to deliver real benefits that are big enough that working Americans stop believing that our system is rigged against them.

The Subtle Balance on Which Trust in Our System Depends

Our system depends on a subtle balance between market capitalism and representative democracy, and the problem is that we have failed to maintain that balance, which requires that the combined economic and political system deliver an acceptable level of living to most of the people.

What are the elements of an acceptable level of living in a stable democracy? In The Crisis of Democratic Capitalism, Martin Wolf suggests that they include:

• Prosperity
• Opportunity
• Security
• Dignity

How Has Our System Failed?

Our capitalist system provides prosperity but falls very short on the other dimensions of an acceptable life. Opportunity in the United States is very unequally distributed. There are plenty of opportunities for people with post-secondary educational degrees, but the situation for people with less education is bleak. Security is also very unequally distributed. Workers who lose their jobs will likely get very limited unemployment benefits, and in addition, they will lose their health insurance. That is why health care costs are the number one cause of personal bankruptcy in the United States. Finally, changes in our economy have robbed millions of people of their dignity. Millions of men can no longer provide for their families, and millions of single women with children are even worse off.

Mr. Trump's election is a symptom of our political system’s failure to deliver an acceptable level of living to many of our people. As a result of that failure, people have lost faith in our system’s fairness, and they have turned his antidemocratic message and policies.

What Should We Do?

If we are to restore that faith, we are going to have to restore the system’s ability to deliver an acceptable level of living. Otherwise, the problem will continue to fester, and our democracy will become more and more unstable. The key to restoring our people’s faith is to under-promise and over-deliver improvements in people’s lives. By “under-promise,” I mean that we should avoid making big campaign promises, because they will not be believed. Campaign promises mean nothing to people who have lost faith in the system itself. People who believe that all politicians are liars will ignore campaign promises. So, we should be very sparing in our campaign promises.

Being sparing in the promises we make will allow us to over-deliver on them. We will be able to deliver more than we promised because we didn’t promise much. For example, we can probably take control of Congress this year just because people are suffering under the current administration. If we do take control, we will be able to deliver a bill that would - if it passed - really helped people with the cost of childcare. Trump would of course veto the bill, but then, we could run on it in 2028 and deliver real benefits after that.  We should take a similar path in other policy areas: promise little but deliver a lot. That is our path to victory in this year’s elections, and that is the path to turn that victory into a bigger victory in 2028. Don't promise much on the campaign trail, but take action when we are in office.

"Values" and "Social Justice": The Language of James Talarico

 "Values" vs. "Social Justice"

In American politics, a focus on “values” has for many years been code for social conservatism. Politicians who have spoken of “values” have tended to oppose things like abortion or gay rights, and they have supported the existing, hierarchical social arrangements. Such politicians have often rooted their views in one or another biblical religious tradition. The focus on traditional social arrangements has in our society gone along with support for “free enterprise” and low taxes.

In contrast, a focus on “social justice” has been code for social and political progressivism and a recognition of the reality of class conflict. Politicians who talk about “social justice” point to the injustices in our society and propose that we should eliminate or reduce them. In recent decades, that has meant support for changes in racial relationships and in gender roles. It also has an economic focus. Politicians who talk about “social justice” have favored government action to ameliorate the lives of Americans through things like a national healthcare system or public support for childcare.

Talarico Brings Together "Values" and "Social Justice"

James Talarico's way of speaking brings the politics of “values” and the politics of “social justice” together. On the one hand, he speaks in religious language and frames his views in biblical teachings. On the other hand, he is a politician of the left. He favors “social justice,” and he emphasizes the importance of class conflict. On his campaign web site, he says,

The biggest divide in this country is not left vs. right. It’s top vs. bottom. Billionaires want us looking left and right at each other instead of looking up at them. 

The people at the top work so hard to keep us angry and divided because our unity is a threat to their wealth and power. So, their cable news networks and their social media algorithms tear us apart.

They divide us by party, by race, by gender, by religion so we don’t notice they’re defunding our schools, gutting our healthcare, and cutting taxes for themselves and their rich friends. It’s the oldest strategy in the world: divide and conquer. 

Talarico’s positions on specific, political issues are often indistinguishable from those of a more typical leftist politician like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez or Bernie Sanders, but unlike them, he does not claim to be a democratic socialist, and he does not use the language of democratic socialism. Instead, he draws on the American religious tradition by emphasizing its strong support for social justice. He says,

My granddad was a Baptist preacher in South Texas. He taught me that we follow a barefoot rabbi who gave us two commandments: love God and love neighbor. Because there is no love of God without love of neighbor. Every single person bears the image of the sacred; every single person is holy — not just the neighbors who look like me or pray like me or vote like me.
[The] billionaires want to keep us from seeing all that we have in common. They want to keep us from realizing there’s far more that unites us than divides us. Because once we do, we’ll come together — across party, across race, across gender, across religion — to fix what’s broken in our country and take back power for ourselves and our communities.
2,000 years ago, when the powerful few rigged the system, that barefoot rabbi walked into the seat of power and flipped over the tables of injustice. To those who love our country, to those who love our neighbors: 

It’s time to start flipping tables.

Talarico also says,

Politicians like John Cornyn and Ken Paxton claim to stand for freedom, family and faith,

• But you can't stand for freedom and control what we say, what we read, and what we do with our bodies. 
•  You can't stand for family and vote against paid family leave, affordable child care, or the right of every American to marry who they love
•  And you can't stand for faith and then warp and weaponize religion to hurt our neighbors

Talarico's Language Has Deep Roots in American Culture

This way of speaking is deeply rooted in American culture. It reaches back to f Frederick Douglass’s Fourth of July speech against slavery:

Standing with God and the crushed and bleeding slave on this occasion, I will, in the name of humanity which is outraged, in the name of liberty which is fettered, in the name of the constitution and the Bible, which are disregarded and trampled upon, dare to call in question and to denounce, with all the emphasis I can command, everything that serves to perpetuate slavery – the great sin and shame of America!

We can hear, too, the cadence of William Jennings Bryan’s famous "cross of gold" speech:

You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns; you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold.

Democrats Should Take Note

This way of speaking frames social justice in a way that resonates with Americans all across our country’s heartland, and the Democratic Party should welcome candidates for political office who talk this way. Most Americans support the policies that people like AOC advocate, but many do not respond to the language of “democratic socialism.” That language may play well to young, educated people in our cities, but to many Americans, it sounds foreign and vaguely menacing. 

Talarico offers a way of framing social justice with deep, American roots, and if Democrats want to win elections in the heartland, we would do well to accustom ourselves to hearing people talk as he does. His campaign for the Senate in Texas will test the value and strength of his style in American politics. We should pay attention.

We Have to Work Together

Antisemitism is One Expression of the Fear of Otherness

I have written a lot lately about rising antisemitism in the United States, but in this article, I want to point out that it would be a mistake to view rising antisemitism in isolation from rising prejudice and violence against all groups that are not white and Christian. We have Islamophobia, anti-immigrant policies, oppression of Native Americans and repeal of civil rights protections for black people. All of our minorities are in danger, and we Jews should see our concerns in that context. 

We Jews tend to think of our sufferings as unique. We see contemporary antisemitism as the expression of an age-old prejudice. We think of the slaughter by the crusaders of the Jews in the Rhineland; we think of the expulsion of the Jews from Spain; and of course, we think of the Holocaust. We say to ourselves, "No other people has suffered as we have." 

This attitude prevents us from seeing that right now, here in the United States, other people are suffering too, and the failure to see their suffering prevents us from building alliances with people who share our interest in building and maintaining a diverse society "with liberty and justice for all."

Instead of thinking of antisemitism as unique, we should see it in the context of widespread fear of people who are “other,” we should understand that antisemitism is one expression of that fear.

Why is the Fear of Otherness So Widespread?

Why is that fear so widespread today? Why is there so much political action and so much political propaganda against minorities? Part of the answer is that much has changed in our country in recent decades. We have far more people of color in our society than we used to have, and what is more important, white people encounter members of minority groups far more often that they used to. 

In the past, white people rarely encountered people of color except as service workers, but today, white people encounter people of color daily on the streets, as employees of supermarkets or local banks, and as neighbors. All of this contact creates a strong sense that our society is changing, and for some of people, the changes are frightening. That fear provides the basis for the widespread fear of "otherness."

Antisemitism springs from the fear of otherness, and in addition, it comes with a long tradition of literary justification from the false medieval blood libel to the forged Protocols of the Elders of Zion and the racist teachings of the Nazis. It is not surprising that in a time of widespread fear of people who are “other,” we should see antisemitism rear its head. If we look at antisemitism in this light, we can see that our interests align with those of all groups that are seen as "other."

Trump's Republicans Have Built a Political Movement Based on Fear

The fact that fear of otherness is widespread is not a complete explanation for the rise of racist politics because fear is not by itself a political movement. Political action and political propaganda can come only from an organized political movement, and a vague fear is not an organized movement. Turning a vague fear into a political movement requires lots of money along with political leaders who want to capitalize on the fear by using it against their enemies. Bringing together the money and the leadership is the role of Trump’s Republican Party. It has created a regime based on fear of minorities including Jews. 

Don't be Confused

Don't be confused by Trump's theatrical statements against antisemitism in universities. Those statements come from his desire to crack down on the universities and from a desire to get more Jews to vote for his supporters. He has no real concern for Jewish students. We know that because we can see that he never speaks out against the antisemitism of his supporters.

Jews Share With Other Minority Groups an Interest in Defeating Trump's Republicans

We Jews along with other minority groups have a common interest in overthrowing Trump’s hold on the federal government. We can accomplish that by working to elect Democrats in this year’s elections. We can be successful if we work on building a coalition with other groups. Jews, Muslims, Latinos, Blacks and Native Americans should all work together to defeat a common enemy. 

We Have to Work Together

In order to work together, we are going to have to table the issue of Israel's policies for now. All sides of that controversy are going to have to tone down their rhetoric. American Jews are going to have to focus on the issues here at home, and non-Jewish progressives are going to have to do the same. Non-Jewish progressives will have to stop saying that the State of Israel is a colonialist entity that should not exist, and Jews will have to stop saying that anyone who criticizes Israel's actions in Gaza is antisemitic. We cannot protect the security of minorities including Jews in American society if we insist on insulting each other. We cannot win if we allow our differences concerning Israel to blind us to our common interest here at home. We have to work together.

Are We Missing the Point of Memorial Day?

 Something Has Begun to Bother Me

Last week, I marched in the Memorial Day Parade in the community where I live in Wisconsin.  I have marched in the parade for many years, and I enjoy it. It has a small-town feel about it, and after a long winter, it is great to spend time outdoors with friends on a warm spring day. However, something about the parade has begun to bother me. I think we are missing the point of the holiday.

What is Memorial Day About?

Memorial Day is about remembering the people who gave their lives to preserve our freedom. As such, it should be a solemn holiday, and it should inspire us to think about those people and to remember the occasions when we have called on our children (most soldiers are very young) to risk their lives. Memorial Day should be a day for solemn reflection. It should not be a day for mindless, flag-waving patriotism, but that is what it has become. Participants in the parade wave flags, and high school bands play patriotic march tunes. There are floats glorifying our country, but all that feels wrong. There should be floats with the names of the local people who lost their lives in our many wars. We should recite their names.

We should also think about the wars in which they died. Were all of them really justified? Have we always been honest with our children when we sent them off to war? Have we ever asked them to risk their lives for unnecessarily? Has our freedom really always been at stake?

We Have Not Always Been Honest

As I marched in the parade, I could not help remembering the occasions in my lifetime when we dishonestly asked our children to make great sacrifices. We sent them off to fight in wars that did not really defend our freedom. Our children fought for many years in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. Each of those wars was lost without diminishing our freedom here in the United States. In effect, we lied to our children and to ourselves when we asked them to show “the last full measure of devotion.” We should think about that; we should recognize our guilt; and we should resolve to do better in the future.

We Should Be Honest in the Future

On Memorial Day, we should not wave flags. We should remember the people who died, and we should accept our responsibility for their deaths. We should resolve never again to send our children to war on false pretenses. We should be honest with our children and with ourselves.

Why is Trump's Foreign Policy So Erratic?

 An Erratic Foreign Policy

Why is Pres. Trump’s foreign policy so erratic? It is erratic because he is trying to find a way to do something that cannot be done. He is flailing around looking for a way to turn back the clock to restore American power and international status to what they were in the years after World War II, but he cannot do it. Trump was elected on a promise to “make American great again.” It was never entirely clear what that meant, but one of its elements was a promise to restore America’s international standing to what it was in the nineteen fifties and sixties when we dominated the world. That promise cannot be kept because, as I discussed in last week’s post, the conditions that made that domination possible have disappeared. There is no way for the United States to dominate today’s world as we did in the period after World War II.

He Is Looking For a Way to Do the Impossible

In his effort to restore the "greatness" of the United States, he keeps running into barriers that he cannot overcome. We can see this in his use of tariffs to try to force other nations to comply with his demands. He raises the tariffs and then lowers them; he imposes tariffs and then “pauses” their implementation. He obviously does not know what will work, but he keeps trying because he does not know that what he is trying to do cannot be done.  We can also see Trump's bewilderment in his conduct of the war with Iran. He entered the war without clearly defined goals and without consulting our allies. Now, he is stuck and is searching for a way to end the war in a way that Iran and the United States can agree on. 

He Gets in His Own Way

In addition, Trump’s self-concept as a "tough guy" gets in his way. As I suggested in another post on this blog, He presents himself as the ultimate tough guy, and he sees conflicts with other nations as occasions to demonstrate his toughness. So, he alienates even our country’s allies by bullying them.  We can see this in his conduct of the current war with Iran. He went to war without consulting our allies and then demanded that they help to open the Strait of Hormuz. When they refused, he insulted them. Now, they are looking for ways to assure their supplies of oil and gas even if the conflict does not end.

We can also see Trump’s bullying style in his approach to the control of the arctic. Instead of working with allies to strengthen the defense of the arctic region, he demanded control of Greenland, and he tried to bully Canada our most important arctic ally. The result is that Canada and the Nordic countries have forged an alliance maintain their control of the arctic against the United States, Russia and China. In this situation, Trump will no doubt look for a way to bully the alliance members into submission, but he will fail to find one.

He Will Continue to Be Erratic

In short, Trump’s foreign policy is erratic because he keeps flailing about looking for a way to accomplish the impossible task of turning back the clock. There is no way to restore the United States to the position of world domination that we had in the years after World War II. The conditions that made that domination possible no longer exist, and we must find a way to adjust to the world in which we are now living. Trump cannot see that. So, he will continue to flail about erratically.

The U. S. Will Not Dominate the World of the Future and Neither Will China

The Era of American Domination of World Trade is Over

The United States will never again be as powerful as we we were in the years after World War II, but China will not replace us. We will never be as powerful as we used to be because the conditions that allowed us to be so powerful no longer exist. China will not replace us because today's world is not the world of 1945.

Our Power Was Due to Unique Circumstances

We became uniquely powerful at the end of World War II because we were the only major, industrial power left standing at the end of the war. The others had been pretty thoroughly flattened and/or bankrupted by the war. We produced more than half of the industrial production in the world, and unlike all of the other major, industrial countries, we were a creditor nation. That situation allowed us to dictate the terms of world trade in the post war economy.

The U. S. is No Longer in Control

People who are over 40 today grew up in the world that the United States created after World War II. We are used to thinking of the world as united under the leadership and control of our country, but the world has changed. The world that we grew up in no longer exists, and we are no longer in control. We no longer produce the bulk of the world’s manufactured goods. There are many other successful manufacturing countries. The most important of them is, of course, China, but others are growing in importance. We are also no longer a creditor nation. We are a debtor nation, and servicing our national debt is the second largest item in our federal budget exceeded only by Social Security. The annual cost of the interest on our national debt now exceeds our military budget.

So, our power has declined, and we can no longer dictate the terms of the world’s economy. Moreover, other countries no longer have to conduct their foreign trade in dollars, and that makes them less dependent on us. They have alternatives. The dollar will continue to be important internationally for a long time, but changes are coming. Oil can now be purchased in Chinese yuan instead of dollars, and China has developed a system called “CIPS” that allows countries to use yuan instead of dollars to settle international accounts. Other countries are also developing systems that bypass the dollar.

We still have the world’s largest military forces, but military power cannot really substitute for economic power because we cannot go to war every time someone does something that we do not like. So, our power is waning. There is nothing that we can do about that because the decline in our power is due to causes that are outside of our control. We must adjust to living in a world that we cannot dominate.

China Will Not Replace Us

Many people believe that as our power declines, China will take our place, but that will probably not happen. China will be a major economic power - perhaps the most important in the world - but China will not dominate the world as we did for many years. The reason is that China faces a world that is very different from the world that we faced in 1945. 

In 1945, we were able to dictate the terms of international trade because we were the only major, industrial power still standing at the end of the Second World War. China has no such advantage in today's world. Today, there are many, strong industrial nations pursuing their own interests. China cannot wave a magic wand and eliminate the dollar from world trade. The dollar will continue to be used, and the United States will continue to be important even if it cannot dominate the world. China cannot eliminate the growing manufacturing power of countries like Brazil or India. Nations like Japan, Canada, Germany, Mexico and the BRICS countries will insist on pursuing their own interests, and they will wield significant power to do so.  Canada's leader Mark Carney is actively pursuing alliances that will allow what he calls the "middle powers" to retain their economic independence from China and the United States. At the same time, the European Union is working to strengthen its military and economic power.  So, China will not be able to dictate the terms of world trade as we did for many years. China will have to get used to living in a world with many economic powers, and so will we.

Increasing Antisemitism Will Strengthen American Zionism and Weaken American Society

 Open Antisemitism Rears Its Head

Open antisemitism is becoming more and more common in the United States. The extreme political right has always included neonazis, White Christian nationalists and other antisemites. The extreme left has trafficked in ideas like the idea that the economy of our country is controlled by Jews. Now, the legitimate opposition to Israel's brutal and extreme actions in Gaza has had the side effect of bringing American antisemitism into the open. Jews in the United States who have never been afraid are afraid now.  This open antisemitism has created a big rift among American liberals and progressives and threatens the Democrats' ability to win control of Congress in this year's general election. In addition, the increase in open antisemitism will have the perverse effect of strengthening American Zionism and will also weaken the solidarity of American society. 

Zionism Was From Its Beginning a Response to Antisemitism

Zionism emerged in Europe at the end of the nineteenth century as a response to antisemitism there. Judah Pinsker’s pamphlet Autoemancipation was written in response to the pogrom in Odessa in 1882. The pamphlet argued that Jews could never be at home in countries that were not their own, and he founded a society to promote settlement in the Land of Israel.

Theodor Herzl wrote his best-known work Der Judenstaat (The Jewish State) and founded the modern Zionist movement in response to the antisemitism displayed during the Dreyfus Affair in Paris in the eighteen nineties.  There he saw mobs in the streets calling for “Death to the Jews,” and he felt that if that could happen in Paris, the world’s most enlightened city, there could be no hope to escape antisemitism anywhere except in a Jewish homeland. 

After World War II, the State of Israel was created, and refugees from the Holocaust as well as Jews who fled from the countries of the Islamic world went to settle there. However, few American Jews have been interested in moving to Israel because antisemitism - while it has existed here – has not been a serious threat to American Jewish communities.

Now, the situation has changed. On the political right, we have seen neo-nazism and other forms of overt antisemitism. On the left, we also see a range of antisemitic views. We see denial of the legitimacy of the State of Israel, and we see a revival of older antisemitic tropes that say that the world is controlled by a Jewish conspiracy (The Protocols of the Elders of Zion) or that Jewish wealth controls the economy. There have been attacks on synagogues, and many Jews who had always been very comfortable in the United States have now become afraid. Synagogues all over the country have invested in improved security. This can only strengthen the Zionist cause among American Jews. As in the past, many people will say that Jews can never really be safe outside of their own homeland. This will be a tragedy.

American Solidarity is Based on Acceptance of All Our Citizens as Real Americans

A second effect of rising antisemitism will be to weaken the solidarity of America society. People from all over the world have made their homes in the United States, and we have built a unique society and a unique polity. The United States invented the idea of citizenship as a voluntary commitment rather than an expression of ethnic identity. A person who becomes an American citizen is an American by the only definition that we have, and that definition is the basis of American solidarity.

That solidarity is rooted in the fact that a person can be an American by choice. In a congressional hearing Fiona Hill  said that she was “an American by choice.” She is English by birth, but now, she is American. No one could say that he/she was “an Englishman or Englishwoman by choice.” A person can become a citizen of the United Kingdom, but a person cannot become a English. One must be born English. There is no other way to become English, and most countries are like the U.K. in that respect. But not the United States.

The fact that people - including Jews - can become American is and always has been a source of strength for us. Immigrant workers powered the development of American industry. The American army in WWII was full of soldiers – including Jewish soldiers - who were the children of immigrants, and they fought valiantly for the country they saw as theirs. If we give up that inclusiveness by excluding Jews, we will have given up a part of the core of what it means to be American. 

Moreover, we should not kid ourselves. The exclusion may begin with Jews, but it will not end there. Already, we have J. D. Vance saying that only Christians can be Americans. Along with Jews, he would exclude the millions of Buddhists, Hindus and Muslims who are part of the fabric of our society. His attitude, if it is accepted by most Americans, will break our society. It will destroy the solidarity of our people and the greatness of our country.