Reading
Two Big Questions

We are approaching a mid-term Congressional election in the USA. Much of what is being said boils down to competing ideas about democracy. There is great concern among civil libertarians about the loss of freedom in this country because of actions taken since 9/11 to make us “safer”. How can we have a democratic society without individual freedom? Others, rail about US foreign policy under Bush 43 being an exportation of our democracy to countries not suited for same.

Historian John Lukacs has written a challenging and thought provoking book entitled Democracy and Populism: Fear and Hatred. In it, Lukacs examines many and varied themes in analyzing where this country is in its democratic maturation. He draws heavily on de Tocqueville in his examination of American style democracy, then, now and exported.

The first volume of de Tocqueville’s work on democracy was entitled [translation from French] About Democracy in America. Near the end of that volume he wrote:
My aim has been to show, by the example of America that laws, and especially customs may allow a democratic people to remain free.
In this one quote we see de Tocqueville’s take that democracy in America was uniquely successful because of the circumstances. And, it is those circumstances that allow freedom within the democratic system.

This makes the exporting of democracy a problematic situation. Promoting freedom through democracy world wide as the centerpiece of foreign policy is really the Americanization of other peoples and nations. Lukacs opines that democratization and Americanization are “not identical; but inseparable”. Is it any wonder much of the world looks at the US as imperialistic, even if that is not the goal?

De Tocqueville and Lukacs both recognize that when America came to be, man was passing from the age of aristocracy to the age of democracy. Today, where there are constitutional monarchies, they exist as a result of popular agreement. It is difficult to challenge the principle of popular sovereignty in the world today. After all, it was sovereign folks who brought down the Iron Curtain. And, when other repressive regimes [North Korea, China, Iran] fall in the future, there rule will not be replaced by aristocrats or monarchs.

But, what arises from the ashes will not necessarily be an Americanized democracy. And, not all freedom within a political system requires the radical individual freedom cherished and exhibited in the USA. So, in reading Lukacs and his interpretation of de Tocqueville, as we evaluate the direction of our government, two questions must be pondered. In countries that do not share the customs, virtues, mores and laws we do, can American style democracy take root? Can the populism that drives change in the world also lead the USA down the path of a police where democratically we exchange freedom for safety?

It is said that all politics is local. That is so, but the future is also decided by the overarching issues that affect what our country is becoming in the world community. As Christians we are further challenged to embrace the role of government consistent with Biblical principles. For too long, the Christian voter in this country has been swayed to vote on individual issues that are renting the moral fabric of this country. Those are very important. But, it is time to look at broader issues that affect the propagation of the Gospel not just at home but throughout the world.