By All Means, Come Live in the US—Just Manage Your Expectations Carefully
In a recent survey, thousands of people from all over the world were asked if they aspired to emigrate from their homeland into another country, and, of those who answered in the affirmative, the United States was by far the most popular destination. In that respect, I’m very proud to be an American, and I certainly see the attraction of living here. But here’s something that most of these would-be immigrants aren’t anticipating, and so I caution them: when you get here, don’t expect to find a democracy in any meaningful sense of the word.
Perhaps the best example is the American people’s attempts to establish some level of gun control; 89% of US voters want enhanced background checks for prospective owners of handguns, assault rifles, etc. But, shamefully, Congress can’t take a single step in that direction.
Here’s another painful reminder, this one directly related to energy and the environment. 26 of our 50 states are suing to overturn the restrictions that the Environmental Protection Agency has set on power plant emissions. That would be hard enough to swallow if it weren’t for the fact that 61% of the people living in those states approve of the emission controls.
I’m reminded of something I wrote on this a couple of months ago:
We Americans are proud that our president made an historic trip this week to Africa and excoriated various national leaders for their suppression of journalists who write articles that are critical of the government. “If you continue to do that, you will have a democracy in name only,” he scolded.
How true that is. But let’s put it in perspective.
Here are a few facts that came from a recent presentation that Harvard Law professor Lawrence Lessig (pictured) gave to a large and earnest audience.
- According to surveys of thousands of Americans, we almost unanimously agree on two things: a) money has too much influence on politics, and b) there is nothing that can be done to change this.
- 5.4 million Americans (a little under 2%) made cash donations to a politician in the last election, but the top 100 gave more than the bottom 4.75 million.
- A study from Princeton University shows an almost 100% correlation between Congressional votes and the interests of these Top 100.
- The same study shows that the decisions that Congress makes on the variety of issues are completely independent of the will of the people. Whether 20%, 40%, 60%, or 80% of the electorate supports a certain subject, this has no statistical bearing whatsoever on how the Senate and the House will vote on the matter.
My hat’s off to Lessig. A brilliant and extremely accomplished human being, he could be doing anything he wants to with the rest of his life, but he’s chosen to restore meaning to our democracy, which means extracting corruption from U.S. politics, a task not unlike pulling half an antelope out of a lion’s mouth.
Yet, unless he (or someone else) is successful in addressing this task, we’re very foolish to think that a sane energy policy (or any of the other goodies we all want) is in the offing.
The statement in the article, “when you get here, don’t expect to find a democracy in any meaningful sense of the word.” is a significant exaggeration.
Obviously the U.S. is less democratic than it could be or would be desirable. There is considerable room for improvement as the article makes inescapably clear. Even so, the will of the people usually eventually is followed even if it takes many years.
The extreme abuses that occurred during the Gilded Age, also known as the Robber Baron Era, were eventually largely rectified when the people became sufficiently fed up. I expect the same thing to happen again, at least eventually.
The fact that large spenders can throw elections needs more careful examination. The amount spent on a political campaign would not much matter if people refused to be swayed by endless repetition of meaningless sound bites which is what is bought by excessive spending on political campaigns. Thus the voters are just as much at fault as the large spenders. Regulations making clear the actual sources of the funds would greatly help.
It is an interesting title when compared to the body of the article. You suggest several points to illustrate that in our “democracy” it is the wealthy who seem to hold more power, not the general population. This “corruption” causes masses of people to be disenfranchised from the political process. Said in another way the masses cannot “manage” the effects of the political process to govern their lives.
This is the same sort of thing encountered by people around the world and in third world nations. They look hopefully that a change in location will change their potential to manage their lives. But your advice is that instead of being able to manage their world they should instead manage their expectations. I am fairly certain that you did not mean this in a harsh way (“let them eat cake,”) but it could have that aspect.
We always have the option of trying to change the world or to change our perspective. A more positive note would be acknowledge the hopefulness of many people and admit to our own failings which they may encounter. We can also hope that foreigners who come to this company will not too quickly give up their dreams and contribute something to making this a better place.
You are correct, sir; I didn’t mean this in a harsh way to would-be immigrants here.
Graig,
Everyone has a different definition of ” Democracy ” . Mostly, government policies are ‘democratic’ and the ”will of the people” when I agree, but not ”democratic” and against the ”will of the people” when I disagree ! 🙂
In truth all ”democratic” forms of government operate as compromises between the dynamics of various social forces.. The US form of ‘democracy’ only provides Constitutional Representative Government, not esoteric perfection.
Academics often sadvocate an ideologically pure, but impractical form of administration, impractical to the dynamics of large modern societies.
To most non-Americans the US obsession with firearms seems exceedingly bizzare, but your figure of 89% is very dubious. You seem to confuse ”democracy ” with responses contained within opinion polls.
Academics and commentators continually find their surveys, studies and postulations confounded by election results. Instead of accepting that the flaws in the cause they sought to endorse, or inaccuracy in the compilation of the survey, study etc, these “experts” attribute often their own failures on sinister dark forces, who have corrupted the “democratic” process with money , or secret influence.
“Democratic” political process is a human innovation, and as such display’s all the confusing dynamics of human genius, and folly. The democratic process must be elastic enough to accommodate the different factions and concepts, without erupting into civil war or repression. The rule by the majority, should respect the rights of the minority, which is the purpose of a constitution.
In an era when social media competes successfully with traditional media, campaign funding is becoming less important than mass grass roots orgaisation. This has proved to be a tremendous boon to the leftist side of politics, allowing more simple messages and populist concepts to proliferate. Often countered by peoples innate understanding of self interest that may not be expressed in surveys or opinion polls, but is evident at the polling booth.
At the end of the day, the ” will of the people ” is expressed primarily through the ballot box. Belly aching because the “people” didn’t agree with your agenda, or the elected Representative may not be doing what you think they should, is your democratic right. ( But you can’t demand the rules changed to suit you).
In reply to your specific complaints:-
1) 89% of Americans do not really believe in gun control. (background checks are ineffective, most gun crimes are committed by people with impeccable back grounds, or are unlicensed). Sadly, disarming the American populace would take a massive effort, and would not receive 89% support.
2) ” 61% of the people living in those states approve of the emission controls” Yet they elect governments that oppose the EPA agenda. Again, what some people say in an opinion poll and how they vote, is often very different. This doesn’t mean the “will of the people” is being ignored, it just means the poll asked the wrong questions, of the wrong people.
3) ” According to surveys of thousands of Americans, we almost unanimously agree on two things: a) money has too much influence on politics, and b) there is nothing that can be done to change this “.
The above is more evidence of what happens when you ask “mom and apple pie” questions in a survey to achieve the result you set out to obtain.
4) Examination of the methodology employed in the study conducted by Princeton reveals a pattern of assumptions and conclusions to a predetermined agenda.
I guess what i am trying to say, is any “democratic” system will be inherently imperfect. The US system has it’s faults, but in a nation where less than 40% of the population can be bothered to vote, it’s as good as can be expected.
After deciding to relocate and having the freedom to choose where, the USA received no consideration whatsoever, the re-election of the great buffoon G.W.Bush was proof positive
it was a country to avoid.
LOL. Seriously. That sounds exactly like something I would have said myself.
I’m wondering where I’ll go if Trump or Carson get elected. I hear New Zealand is nice.
Craig,
Australia’s smaller neighbor is a the sort of nation you would really appreciate. NZ is definitely one of the world most beautiful nations. New Zealand is a very friendly and historically interesting country with a great many social/political advances which were firsts for any nation.
Certainly a great (and safe) vacation destination.
Thanks. In this case, however, it wouldn’t be vacation; it would be an expatriation. 🙂