Editorial

Columnist urges government of, by and for the people

Why did we, the people, give up our power?

Around the world in the late 20th century, humanity witnessed and fought for a golden age of democracy. Dictatorships fell and constitutions were written as people decided they wanted freedom and power to decide for themselves what was needed.

Millions of people bound themselves together. Beneath their feet fell Ferdinand Marcos' dictatorship in the Philippines, Franco's fascist government in Spain, South Africa's apartheid, the last Hindu monarchy in Nepal and more.

Movements of disciplined, organized people made powerful commitments to human dignity. The U.S. Civil Rights Act outlawed racial segregation. The Philippines' and South Africa's constitutions were among the most progressive ever.

Universal housing became a right, along with healthcare, education and the ability for all citizens to vote. Greater liberty supercharged economies and reduced inequality. U.S. economists called this period "the great compression." A new day was dawning, full of potential and hope that things would continue to get better.

With these victories came a promise: power was returned to the hands of the people, so that government would work for the good of all—not just a few.

The promise had an unanticipated consequence. If the government was to represent the people, what need was there for alliances of unions, churches, universities, neighborhoods and civic groups that applied political pressure to bring the changes?

As movement leaders assumed positions in new governments, the message for everyone else was clear: go home. Power transferred from the people to the state. People accepted that because, after years and decades of fighting, they were exhausted by mass incarcerations and assassinations.

The coalition that ousted Marcos in the "People Power Revolution" disbanded, the South African Network of Civic Associations was absorbed by the African National Congress (ANC), many American civil rights leaders took on elected offices and power passed from the people to governments they trusted and, for the first time, saw themselves represented in.

For a while, things worked. There was progress. Homes were built, schools desegregated, incomes grew and barriers to healthcare, employment and dignity lowered. Gradually, this changed. Without persistent pressure from people's organizations and as those who remembered battles aged out of office, other voices gained momentum. Private interests then exerted a heavier pull on elected officials than public voices.

Unchecked by organizations calling for accountability, private interests made the government a tool of their interests: revoking the 1933 Glass-Steagall Banking Act, lowering corporate taxes, undermining labor unions and repealing regulations.

With the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United changing campaign finance limits, candidates depended more on corporations than constituents for donations, tilting the balance of power.

With deregulation, where economic growth once was plowed back into public goods—education, infrastructure and public health—for all people, leaders were untethered from this responsibility. Economic growth became good for the rich and bad for everyone else. Public goods were exploited and depleted.

By the time communities noticed the interests of their elected officials had shifted from fearing the power of people's organizations to mobilize constituents, to fearing that corporate donors would withdraw campaign funds, it was too late. Citizens were reduced to mere voters.

We forgot how to do more than march and protest. Gone were the local, people-driven movements to back up demands with political might instead of empty appeals to justice and morality.

Networks of organizations—Martin Luther King Jr.'s Southern Christian Leadership Conference, the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, the Congress of Racial Equity, and unions and union leaders who drove American automakers to the bargaining table and set the foundation for America's middle class—withered from the political landscape.

Policy followed power. Business boomed because of political loyalty to big business. The unprecedented economic growth failed to trickle down.

Politicians tied themselves in knots to explain how the economy could reach record highs as everyday families reached new lows. Inequality ballooned in what economists labeled the "great divergence."

After many elections and candidates promising change would come by voting in the right politician, people felt they were lied to. Promises in idealistic documents, constitutions and covenants were not delivered and seemed further away.

Countries that threw off dictators found little changed in 30 years of democracy. The elite remained entrenched. The majority grew poorer. The government worked for someone, but not them.

The 2008 crash revealed that the system exists to serve those at the top. Everyday people can suffer, lose their homes and life savings, but God forbid if a banker goes to jail.

For many, democracy lost its credibility. It became associated with incompetence, gridlock, ineptitude and an inability to do anything about the concrete problems. Frustrated, people become more open to fantasies. The system had been a lie, so why save it? They wanted someone to take our pain seriously and do something about it.

Around the globe and on nightly news, we see the growth of authoritarian politics and populist rhetoric at the expense of values of liberal democracy.

The common solution posed to this "crisis of democracy" is that we need better leaders to pass the right laws and protect our liberties. Better laws and new leaders do not solve the problem. We need better citizens.

Only by teaching people again how to build power to hold their representatives accountable can we ensure our interests drive the agenda.

We may think the challenge of our times is that people are drawn to authoritarianism. It is not. These are symptoms, not the cause.

The challenge of our times is—as it has been at other turning points in American history—to recreate and reconsecrate a government that is of the people, by the people and for the people.

Cameron Conner - Columnist