Revolutions
Revolution is sexy. But it never quite seems to work, does it?
Across history, there has been, for a long long long time now a battle between those who have and those who do not. The space between the two grows.
Sometimes there is revolution. And everyone is always so gung-ho about revolution. And those who have something to lose always fear revolution.
But across history, revolution never really works out. Revolutions lead to extreme governance, power struggles, intense and ongoing fighting with insurgencies, and rapid and chronic swings in power and political control. There was an English civil war. England had a revolution. A monarchy ended up back in power. The French revolution ended up with a new king. To be fair, the American revolution wasn’t so much a revolution as much as a cessation. The American people didn’t rise up and take control of their government (England). They just claimed ownership and the right to govern the American colonies. So we’re not counting that. Sorry. The Bolshevik revolution ended with Stalinism and eventually dictatorship under Putin. To be fair, a lot of South American revolutions were directly undercut by CIA intervention.
The point is, revolutions don’t really work. Not in the long term. They’re cool and all. Obviously everyone wants to be a revolutionary. That’s cool. But it’s the stuff for movies and book.
Extreme in either direction very quickly becomes about proof of ideological purity and not about taking legitimate action to improve the conditions of the nation and the wellbeing of its citizens.
Left or right. Neither end up being all that capable of taking care of its people.
Which is why Democracy is the answer. But true democracy.
We don’t really have a true democracy in the US. Yes, everyone over the age of 18 gets a vote. But, we have an electoral system that means that the popular vote (the national majority) doesn’t actually win. The popular vote elects people who then get to cast an electoral college vote. In a lot of states, this elector overpower the minority voice. True consensus does not reign.
Also running for office requires a tremendous financial investment. Money dominates our politics. The politicians that we are offered are often hand selected by interest groups. Democracy would be anyone can represent their people if they are voted for. Anyone can run for office and has a chance to fight. That really isn’t how things work here.
So I am all about balance. Finding a middle and living in the nuance of that middle. Because either end, in its extremes, will bring horror, basically as a historic rule at this point.
We can change the electoral system. That isn’t impossible. We can change rules about political and campaign financing. That isn’t impossible either. We can change the barrier to entry. We can change so much. We can reshape our pseudo democracy into a true democracy. That isn’t an impossible task.
How do you eat an elephant? One bite at a time. You don’t try to swallow it whole.
So we need to not let our minds wander toward revolution. We need to think smaller, more strategically. We need to think about local politics. We need to focus on small, iterative systems changes at more local levels. We need to think about grand design and work backwards. What needs to change first? And then what after that?
That’s not nearly as sexy. But that is, undeniably, more effective in the long term.
A single wealth tax in California is great for a headline. But also, obviously it pisses off a ton of people with money and power. Would working toward a more progressive and equitable tax system not be a more appropriate approach?
Anyway, I think a lot about revolution. It’s cool and all. But I think our only real shot at creating a better future is to re-align how we think about democracy and work slowly, deliberately, and methodically to establish such a democracy.
Leave a comment. Let’s have a conversation.
