Michael J. Donohue’s well-written plea for a quick, bipartisan resolution of our nation’s leadership crisis naively assumes our form of governance fits what Winston Churchill perceived as a “democracy” (“The nation’s leadership crisis,” Voice, Oct. 24). Unfortunately, today our government process is not primarily focused on civic and community goals.
In reality, America politically has devolved into a government not of the people but of special interests, and those special interests are a reflection of each of us. Whether we are retired and do not wish to sacrifice one penny of our Social Security check for the future solvency of the system; whether we lobby for the elimination of the inheritance tax to pass wealth onto the next generation; whether we demand or ferociously object to government protected and funded abortion; whether we want government to help us avoid an obvious civic responsibility resulting from urban sprawl; whether we demand that someone else, public or private, pay for our medical costs, regardless if we can afford to pay ourselves–our collective governance focus abruptly stops with our own perceived self-interest.
It’s useful to reflect on the cultural determinants that impact our community and civic behavior. Perhaps the most significant is the now embedded existentialist belief that the world revolves around our individual axis and each of us, through an act of individual will, can cause others to meet our personal demands, whether emotional, economic or physical. Also, there is inexorable erosion of America’s economic middle class and an increase in both the lower and upper classes. Significantly, more and more hard-working people are earning less and less in real economic terms than 25 years ago, and this reality will only become increasingly intrusive in America’s lives within a global dynamic.
In effect, we’re getting exactly what we want and deserve from those officials elected by fewer and fewer voters–a governmental process not of the people but of special interests. Would Churchill approve, or would he suggest, perhaps, that an authoritative democracy would better suit our insatiable personal demands?
