Friday

Is American democracy in peril?

Claudine Gay says U.S. is dealing with historic levels of political polarization, but there is reason for hope
by Colleen Walsh

Political scientist Claudine Gay said her interest in the field developed out of a desire to understand what motivates the political choices and behaviors of ordinary people and “how well those perspectives are represented in national politics.” Since the Capitol riots on Jan. 6, 2021, Gay, the Edgerley Family Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences and Wilbur A. Cowett Professor of Government and of African and African American Studies, has found herself rethinking how she approaches the discipline and reconsidering the foundational norms, values, and institutions long considered central to American democracy. She shared some of those thoughts in a recent exchange with the Gazette. This interview was edited for clarity and length.

 

Q&A

Claudine Gay

GAZETTE: American democracy appears to many to be on shaky ground right now. How does that affect your work/scholarly perspective?

 

GAY: As a scholar, I feel challenged in bringing the normal paradigms and theoretical frameworks we rely on in political science to understanding the conditions that we face right now in the U.S, because so many of the assumptions that typically ground our thinking have been upended. This crystallized for me as I witnessed the aftermath of the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol. Here was a moment when thousands of people turned against American democracy itself, choosing violence as the way to achieve their aims. I thought a threat that profound would shock and unify us. But it, instead, has generated as polarized a response as any other issue or event. That reality has disrupted my thinking, and it forces us all in the discipline to consider anew the basic norms, values, and institutions that we’ve taken for granted as stable (and stabilizing) features of American political life.

 

GAZETTE: Can you talk a bit more about your reaction to Jan. 6? Has it evolved since the event itself?

 

GAY: Before I became the dean of FAS, I taught a course titled “Democratic Citizenship,” the study of public opinion and political participation in contemporary American politics. The question we kept returning to is the basic premise of democracy, whether ordinary people can be trusted to make consequential decisions. And as we interrogated that idea over the course of the semester, we would focus increasingly on the conditions that enable ordinary people to make consequential decisions, realizing that context matters.

 

Since Jan. 6, I have been thinking about how many of those conditions are directly under assault. One of those conditions is access to a common foundation of facts, which play a central role in the functions of a democratic society. But with a fractured media landscape, as well as the echo-chamber-like quality of social media, Americans now live in separate “factual” universes.

 

Another important contextual factor is equal access to a transparent, secure electoral process. Our democracy is made better the more we all participate, not when fewer people participate. And yet nearly two dozen state legislatures are working with relentless energy to erect barriers that will make it even more difficult to vote. If successful, these measures may have the effect of erasing whole groups of people from American political life.

 

Another condition that we talked about was the confidence that your voice will be heard and represented, which is the most basic expectation of democracy. A sense of political efficacy, reinforced by evidence of democratic responsiveness, is in part what motivates people to participate. From extreme partisan gerrymandering to the continuing attempts to discredit the 2020 election, all of these efforts give citizens ample reason to question whether their voices are heard and represented.

 

GAZETTE: Do you think we can take some comfort in the idea that democracy is always somewhat in flux, that we are always somewhat more or less democratic?

 

GAY: I’m not sure if I take “comfort” in the idea, but it does help to put this moment in perspective. Multiracial democracy is a work in progress for the U.S. — that’s undeniable. But a sense of alarm about signs of democratic backsliding, given what is at stake (including our credibility in the world), still feels appropriate.

 

GAZETTE: How do we ensure that democracy survives in this country?

 

GAY: One answer might be a bipartisan consensus and commitment to re-establish a common foundation of facts (for example, about the outcome of the 2020 presidential election), and to reaffirm the importance of broad-based democratic participation. But such consensus is elusive. If it were a fringe movement outside of politics that aimed to sow distrust in our electoral system and limit access to the vote, then it would be easier to see how we might find our way to a solution. But this is not happening outside of the political system; rather, it finds expression mainly through the Republican Party. That is what makes this so alarming. It is so hard to see how to break through in any kind of bipartisan way.

 

GAZETTE: The nation has endured deep divisions before. Why is this moment different?

 

GAY: The existence of different views and positions, hotly debated and fought over, is normal and, in many ways, is a strength of democracy. But the polarization that exists now is unprecedented in its intensity. It’s reached levels that are toxic when it comes to the ability to come together on any issue. When you have a situation where substantial majorities of Democrats and Republicans view the other party as “immoral” and a “threat to the U.S.,” that is not ordinary political and policy disagreement. There’s no room for even a conversation across partisan lines, let alone compromise.

 

If we exist in a moment when bipartisan collaboration and compromise are impossible and in some ways anathema to partisans, then we are not well-served by decision-making systems that require supermajorities. If being a Republican now means that you minimize — even embrace and normalize — the Jan. 6 attack, if it means that you continue to discredit the 2020 election, if it means that you believe the problem with democracy is when too many people vote, if that is all part of the identity of being Republican now, how do you engage those partisans in the urgent work of protecting our democracy?

 

GAZETTE: Can you give me some examples of that work?

 

GAY: We need federal legislation to protect voting rights, such as the two bills now stalled in the Senate. These bills alone won’t entirely undo all the damage that’s been done through state-level action over the last year and a half, but some of the restrictive measures now in place would be rolled back. Federal legislation is impossible, however, without the elimination of the filibuster, given the Republican party’s commitment to making it maximally difficult to vote.

 

GAZETTE: Is there anything you look to that gives you any hope?

 

GAY: What gives me hope is that even as difficult as we make it to vote, so many people persevere and turn out. In the 2020 presidential election, more than 159 million Americans voted, many for the first time. That’s the largest total number of ballots cast in U.S. history, by a wide margin. Citizens overcame all of the obstacles we put in front of them — sometimes waiting in poll lines for two, three hours — to demand that their voices be heard. That to me is the clearest expression of the continuing faith in the power and promise of multiracial democracy, in the belief that ordinary people can be trusted to make consequential decisions. Many advocacy groups are engaged in deep organizing and grassroots mobilization to register new voters and ensure their access to free and fair elections. These efforts were pivotal in 2020 and will continue to be. An expanding electorate, millions of citizens newly awake to the transformative power of the vote, and more determined than ever to be part of the democratic process and to be equitably represented in government — that’s what gives me hope.

 

Matthew Cooke

 Matthew Cooke is the writer-director of How to Make Money Selling Drugs, a documentary film which criticizes the war on drugs in the United States, and Survivors Guide to Prison, about the prison system. Cooke also often serves as his own narrator, editor, cinematographer and visual effects artist.

 

My friends. I haven’t written or spoken about our political situation in a while - mainly because I’ve been focused on making more long form content.

But I had some thoughts about education I want to share. Maybe it sparks something in you as well.

Most of the public arguments about education today are limited to manufactured outrage over curriculum - and the skyrocketing costs of student debt, which depress our entire economy much like a recession - which is affecting everyone.

It’s a really an easy issue to resolve offering K - 16 (instead of k - 12) like most other wealthy countries.

Cancelling student debt is a no brainer. Could be paid for by billionaire profits alone since the pandemic. And it would spike consumer spending power and grow businesses as a result.

But there is an even deeper issue worth considering - which is rethinking public school entirely.

Before the 19th century there was no such thing as a public school system available to all the people, regardless of income or demography.

Public schools as we know them are on the one hand a fairly recent invention and on the other haven’t seen much innovation in the last century.

Academics are separated by factory bells and students are grouped by their physical age - the least likely factor in predicting commonalities. And test scores and grades are emphasized over personal experience and discovery.

This system is supposed to compete for children’s attention at a time where the most sophisticated communications technology in the history of humankind is in their pockets 24 hours a day.

Meanwhile the arts, the category of activity that engages the entirety of the human experience, mind, heart, and body - that which strives to reflect the fundamental essence of what it means to be a human being is the first to go on the chopping block when budgets run short.

Instead, kids cram answers to questions by rote memorization that often appear completely alien and irrelevant to life in the modern world.

No wonder there are record amounts of teenagers diagnosed with attention issues, medicated into submission to conform to a system of education that was created centuries ago and now competing against fortune 500s employing weapons grade psychological tactics for marketing dominance.

Meanwhile: We don’t hear nearly enough about creative problem solving - the critical skill required for progress in a society.

Creative problem solving requires two types of thinking: Convergent and divergent.

Convergent thinking is the application of linear, logical steps to analyze a problem which has only one correct solution: what is the purpose of a coffee cup? Well it is a cup for holding coffee!

Convergent thinking is what we learn in public school. It’s about discipline. Conformity. And that is useful.

But there could be other purposes for a coffee cup, couldn’t there? That is called divergent thinking. We need that skill for advanced problem solving - for problems that haven’t been solved yet.

Little children are notoriously good at divergent thinking, and able to conceive outside the box, coming up with multiple answers to common problems at what’s considered genius levels of thinking but as we get older, children and then adults, are less and less able to think creatively - most likely because doing so soon becomes an act of rebellion - to such an extent it could get you a failing grade on your tests.

Imagine that. Creative thinking can hold you back.

This is why many world-renowned education and creativity experts advise that we should be going completely the opposite way of standardization.

That instead we should be encouraging collaboration and individualization.

We could be building flexibility in curriculum to suit different learning styles. Some learn best by listening. Some by watching. Some can only learn by doing. Some by teaching!

Some have different specialties, challenges. Some are better at collaboration - some work better in pairs or alone.

But one thing we all have in common is the need for association in learning - meaning there needs to be some connection to our lives, to our hearts at the very least for learning to have meaning and stick.

That’s why the best advice I ever heard in college was to not take classes at all. Don’t take classes - a friend suggested. Take teachers.

A great teacher can make any subject fascinating. And turn the specific minute detail of a thing into a universal life lessons. An easy example is when you’re learning a new sport - which by nature is action packed and engaging.

Snowboarding for example. A good coach might advise that where you’re looking, that’s where you’re headed. Well that applies to the slopes and to life.

A great teacher illuminates a truth you carry with you to the next life challenge and the next.

Associations create opportunities for discovery. And deep connections, between ideas, experiences, problems and solutions are the best way to learn.

Because that is how the mind works - by connecting things.

If you ever want to memorize a grocery list, imagine each item smashing into the walls and furniture in the different rooms in your house, then do an imaginary tour of your house and you’ll remember each item.

Without an association, a list of random items becomes meaningless and forgetful.

So what if we made providing context, meaning and association to our outdated school systems?

Let’s take the worst grades of all - junior high school.

When we’re 12, 13, 14 years old. Feeling super awkward and weirded out instead of sitting still learning stuff we have zero application for - we showed up to an empty field and build our own school? Like an erector set?

Set the foundation. Framed the walls. Learned plumbing. Electricity. Put together a printing press. Published a newspaper.

Put an old car back together for a teacher to drive us to get supplies.

Soldered circuit boards to assemble a computer. Ran in telephone lines. Learned math and science THAT way.

And then got introduced to the arts in the context of how those profoundly life changing technologies were invented.

Learned about the Chinese inventors of aqueducts. The Arabic inventors of numerals. The Indian inventors of the ruler, the button, and cataract surgery. The African concept of Ubunto - our shared humanity. The Ethiopian inventors of coffee before we had our first cup.

Kids could sit in classrooms they built with their own hands, giving them confidence and self reliance so by the time they were 16 they felt more like adults - like they used to 100 years ago.

Because as important aside: the teenager is a modern invention.

Nobody was even using the term until the 1940s. It was just adults and kids.

Modernization has created an unnaturally extended period of adolescence - that combined with our current public school system cleaves huge cultural divisions between generations - between children and their ancestors, creating feelings of isolation, anxiety, and the ungrounded existential crises that define post modern industrial life.

We are cut off from wisdom, continuity and communal identity.

Generational differences are getting even more defined as our communications technologies develop faster and faster.

What is the use of that?

Other than for marketing departments to have more demographic markers to target.

Education comes from a latin word which means rearing or training. But what are we training for?

According to Maslow our hierarchy of needs starts with the physical, air, water, food, shelter, sleep, and moves inward to our needs to feel safe, secure, being healthy, and deeper still, the need for community, family, friends, belonging, self esteem, feeling love and respect for ones self and others, and then finally: self actualization - realizing your potential, bringing your gifts to life!

Whether that’s your sense of peace, or humor, to some talent or outward skill.

And feeling that you’ve contributed something to your world, your family, your descendants. All of that, we are training for - all the time.

There’s a wise bit of council for people who are looking for self actualization that practice means attainment and attainment means practice -- that means we have to always be in practice. Always in training.

Always working on actualizing our selves more deeply and authentically.

As some of our first nation brothers and sisters say, always be in ceremony.

Pablo Casals - the master cellist. 81 years old was asked why he still practiced 4-5 hours a day Pablo said “Because I think I’m making progress.”

The master filmmaker Akira Kurosowa upon receiving a lifetime achievement award from George Lucas and Steven Spielberg said “I don’t feel that I understand cinema yet...

I really don’t feel I have grasped the essence of cinema. Cinema is a marvelous thing but to grasp its true essence is very, very difficult.”

If the master artists still considered themselves students at the end of their long and accomplished lives, how much for the rest of us?

If we’re all students for the duration of our time here, then perhaps there shouldn’t be any argument at all, that our educations, and our training should be the number one priority of an advanced society.

As all else we do comes from that - the actualization and demonstration of our humanity.