An equitable balance between individual freedoms and community responsibility, in a country that is mostly urban in nature, has been a goal for some, and an anathema for others, for as long as human beings have gathered in large groups.
In principle, the two concepts would seem to be totally incompatible with each other. Yet we cannot escape the reality of living for ourselves and existing in a community.
If we all lived in caves, where the next cave was several miles away, or lived in a small house on the prairie where the “next-door-neighbor” was a day’s horseback ride away, we might get away without any sense of community responsibility. Equally, if we all lived in tight communities, almost on top of each other, it might be tempting to only think about community responsibility and ignore individual freedoms.
Unfortunately, human nature has proved over-and-over again that neither of these concepts work, on their own, over any extended time-period, when “neighbors” are reasonably close – in other words, in a community. One concept or the other might be imposed for short periods, following restrictive ideologies, but they are always abandoned eventually, often by violent means. I can cite a multitude of examples from despotic kings and emperors, the Magna Carta, the prohibition of slavery, the experiment of communism, and even, perhaps, the experiment of democracy.
We seem to head in one direction then, after some upheaval, often violent, we have a course correction in the opposite direction. We never seem to strike a balance that is acceptable to all. After multiple centuries, even millenia, a workable balance between the two concepts may be an impossible dream and we are therefore forever locked in conflict between the two.
I was inspired to think again about this dichotomy by a recent article by Robert Reich where he hypothesizes, perhaps wishes, for a “course correction” in the current state of politics in the United States. In the article, he promotes a “course correction” away from Donald Trump’s seemingly inexorable descent into totalitarian rule and despotic dictatorship.
Human history would confirm that such a course correction will happen, but the major questions, as always, are when, and will I live to see it.
It is tempting to use the excuse that Trump’s takeover of democracy has been so rapid that it’s been almost impossible to counter his offensive. That’s true, but that’s what all dictators have ever done because they know, in their heart-of-hearts that their “day-in-the-sun” is limited. Eventually, the population revolts, and they end up in a proverbial drainage ditch, ala Gadaffi, Sadam Hussein, Julius Cesar and Hitler, among many others. We should be used to, and instantly recognize, this breakneck speed approach, but, then, we never seem to learn from history.
I wish I had a solution, I don’t. However, I am somewhat mollified by what we have developed in a modern democracy. The concept of democracy is high-minded, and the implementation, let alone the maintenance, is fraught with dangers from all corners of human existence, as history amply demonstrates. However, if we remember the words of Winston Churchill, when he was asked what he thought of democracy, we might just be inspired to effectively and efficiently manage “course corrections” in the future, and in time to avoid the worst atrocities of Donald Trump, a future Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, Victor Orban, Erdoğan or Xi Jinping.
Churchill responded to that question by stating that, “Democracy is the worst form of government ever invented ….. except for every other! We must defend it vigorously, despite its flaws. It would seem to be the best way we have developed to deal with the conflict between individual freedom and community responsibility.
