What Keeps Me Up At Night

I grew up in a household in which politics was not discussed, not because it was impolite or because conversations would devolve into screaming matches, but because politics apparently did not concern people like me. My upbringing told me that politics was reserved for politicians, elites, academics, movers and shakers. You can imagine my shock when I began to delve into the world of politics and realized just how much politics did affect me. From the prejudices I faced from age 4 to the food that came to my table, politics had been shaping my life without me even thinking about it. And then I looked at everything that was going wrong with this world and the community around me. As I clambered out of my sheltered perspective, I found myself asking again and again: if this country and its democracy are so great, why do we have so many problems?

A while back, this clip from the opening scene of The Newsroom was circulating, and I was really struck by it. At the time, I could not quite articulate how I felt in response to it, but today, I can start to solidify these thoughts.

I am cautious about the nostalgic approach to America, about how great it "used to be" (one reason being that the rose-tinted glasses of nostalgia can romanticize pretty much anything, and American history is not exactly immaculate). But what resonates with me, and what I am sure resonates with most of the country right now, is that every feeling we have in reaction to our country, our sadness, our disappointment, our anger, our hubris, our hope, is often rooted in our pride and love for this country. Why wouldn't we want our country to be the best it can be? Why wouldn't we get upset if it didn't? As we move forward in this discussion, I want the reader to keep this in mind. Voicing our concerns about this country is patriotic. It would be neglectful to do otherwise. Will McAvoy, the protagonist of this show, only really scrapes the surface when he says:

We were able to be all these things and do all these things because we were informed... the first step in solving any problem is recognizing there is one. America is not the greatest country in the world anymore.

Some cited statistics I found on my own: of 35 developed countries studied, America ranked 34th in child poverty rates. A study from 2013 determined that the United States had the highest incarceration rate in the world and also had the highest prison population of a whopping 2,239,751 people. The U.S. ranks first in deaths by violence and has more of such deaths than the next three countries combined. It also ranks third in income disparity. A 2012 study by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development found that while the U.S. spends more on education per student than most countries, it performed at average levels in reading and science and below average, 27th out of the 34 countries surveyed, in fact, in math.

So, first step: recognize there is a problem. Second step: identify where the problem is coming from. Is it just about being informed, as McAvoy asserts?

I do not believe that it is a coincidence that voter turnout in this country is lower than in most developed states, with under 54% of the voting-eligible population coming out to vote in 2012 and about 58% this past November. The root of the problem, however, is not people refusing to vote. The U.S. actually has the seventh highest percentage of registered voters and ranks fifth in extent of possible civic engagement. Juxtaposed with this is the fact that less than half of the population bothers to engage in a single civic activity a year, and almost a quarter do not discuss politics. Clearly, the conversation about American democracy does not end with voter turnout; something else tells citizens that they do not need to be as involved with politics and civic duties.

As I went through my "political awakening," rather than seeing only ignorance, I began to notice how people around me actually dealt with (or did not deal with) politics. I met children that would spew terrifying assertions repeated verbatim from their parents. I had friends who would alter their views depending on who they were with just to please others. Some were raised to never discuss politics because the issues are too contentious, and others still think politics do not apply to them. And the general rule of thumb is to not bring up politics at all. While I understand why people may want to resist getting into huge arguments every day, the problem with American democracy is that we don't teach people how to actually practice it, preventing them from engaging with crucial political matters that will impact millions of citizens. And this is distinct from just being informed about the political issues of the day; no good comes from knowledge if it is not exercised.

We need to stop keeping people from discussing difficult issues publicly. We need to stop trying to make politics a competition, a game, a source of entertainment. We need to urge people to realize their personal stake in politics, to educate themselves, to pursue solutions because the problems of today are not going to magically fix themselves. And with a democratic system, the people have the power to do this.

When discussing modern democracy, one must at some point turn to Enlightenment thinking. Immanuel Kant penned a short but fundamental piece called Answering the Question: What Is Enlightenment? in which he defined the Enlightenment as the "emergence" of a person's ability to reason on their own. But what is most interesting is his distinction between private and public uses of reason:

"This enlightenment requires nothing but freedom – and the most innocent of all that may be called "freedom": freedom to make public use of one's reason in all matters. Now I hear the cry from all sides: "Do no argue!" The officer says: "Do not argue – drill!" The tax collector: "Do not argue – pay!" The pastor: "Do not argue – believe!" Only one ruler in the world says: "Argue as much as you please, but obey!" We find restrictions on freedom everywhere. But which restriction is harmful to enlightenment? Which restriction is innocent, and which advances enlightenment? I reply: the public use of one's reason must be free at all times, and this alone can bring enlightenment to mankind.

In other words, in an Enlightened world, you voice your opinions in public, while in "private," you should "obey." However, in today's culture, the public and private spheres are flipped. Politics is too quarrelsome, too divisive, a private matter not to be discussed in open forums; you obey in public. What happened at work today, what you ate for breakfast this morning, and who you are dating, however, are free to go up on Facebook. Passing off political views as mere personal opinions that should be shoved under the rug is detrimental for democracy, the antithesis of it.

If the average person is given the impression that their political views are insignificant, "private," and personal, they do not voice them, and if opinions are not voiced, how can officials hear them? An article by Meira Levinson, a professor at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, describes the vicious cycle. "There is widespread recognition that political power is distributed in vastly unequal ways among U.S. citizens," so people are disheartened. "Why should we care?" Levinson asks for these people. See, they don't want to hear us after all. See, all of the average people are being ignored. Then, this status quo is used as a reason to not attempt to close the civic engagement gap. Voices continue to not be heard. The inequality is reinforced. "Political participation, expression of democratic values, stable political attitudes, and adoption of 'enlightened self interest'" all suffer because of this idea that everyone's political voices are not of equal importance.

It is only natural, then, if your voice does not matter, to believe your vote does not matter. An article from The Independent Review screams in its title: "Now More Than Ever, Your Vote Doesn't Matter," reinforcing every American's worst fear. If I had a dollar for every time someone told me, "I'm just one vote, my vote doesn't matter," I would not have to worry about ever holding a job. The article asserts that a vote, as most people think of it, only "matters" when it is the tiebreaker vote, then goes on to explore the statistics of your vote being that one tiebreaker. But here's some simple math: if 100% of the American people thought their vote did not matter, 0% would vote. It is this attitude that is to blame for preventing citizens from engaging with political issues.

Another effect of this outlook, which goes back to feeding into why we do not seem able to solve some of our most basic problems efficiently, is that we do not educate enough about civics in schools. This article in The Atlantic investigates this issue, and says three essential things. The first is that "it's important that we show [students] that that big machine that seems like it has nothing to do with you matters more than you think." As I described in my last post, every single thing you do is somehow affected by politics. Everything is regulated or protected or limited or promoted by the powers that be, so if you have a voice in your experience in this country... why not use it? The second is admitting our schools (my input: also the culture outside of schools, how we raise children, how we are taught to interact with our peers, etc.) do not have enough civic education. You only know what you don't know until you are exposed to it, and once you are educated in what you can do and what more you can find out, people can go on their own. All you need is a little push. And the third is that "you have to know about how the government works in order to make change."

Furthermore, not feeling like your voice matters and not seeing things change for the better for you personally make you distrust the government. Pew Research Center has reported a steady trend of more citizens being dissatisfied about the direction of the country since about halfway through 2003 and a catastrophic drop in trust in government, with over 70% feeling confident about the government in the late 50s and early 60s to today's less than 20%. It is no surprise, with this sentiment coming from the American people, that they have been prioritizing "freshness" in candidates, or the "outsiders."

Jonathan Rauch, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution and contributing editor at The Atlantic and National Journal, wrote an article in 2015 on "amateur" presidents and other high-level leaders. While past presidents and vice presidents have mostly followed the 14-Year Rule, which says no candidate secures the position with longer than 14 years from his first gubernatorial or Senate win, recent officials have been having less and less experience. Our Senate, gubernatorial, and vice-presidential winning candidates' years of experience have been decreasing since the 60s. With our Presidents, George W. Bush had six years as Governor, Barack Obama had four years as Senator, and Donald Trump had 0 years of any political experience whatsoever. The ramifications of avoiding public discourse on important political issues of all citizens clearly shows in our voting patterns, and if we are to build a government the majority of us can trust again, we have to get involved.

Obviously, there are still many, many obstacles in the way of solving America's greatest problems, even once people start to become more aware and articulate in their opinions. However, if we are able to successfully address changing our culture so people can learn to use their voices and realize if they choose to be silent, then there is no way for them to be heard, we will be able to change the effects mentioned in this post. Disillusionment, sadness, hopelessness are heavy and can discourage you, but they are not reasons to step away for good. If no one confronts a problem, the problem does not just slink away. It expands, it takes root, and it only becomes more difficult to remove. Uncertainty and distrust are actually great reasons to get engaged, to get in there and change things for yourself, and realizing this is what propelled me into the world of politics.