It’s easy to look at the angry state of politics and blame partisanship. But partisanship isn’t what’s changed.
Partisanship existed in 1988, yet that year, Republicans elected, reelected, or held Senate seats in Washington, Rhode Island, California, Delaware, and Minnesota. Democrats did so in Tennessee, Texas, and Nebraska. There were pockets of agreement, not because Democrats or Republicans were any less partisan but because they were less likely to give themselves over to their baser instincts for tomfoolery, which today is almost a job requirement.
Ideological identities shift over time, but it’s noteworthy that both sides of the aisle have at some point embraced an identity of “liberalism.” In the 1980s and 1990s, a “liberal” came to define left-wing Democrats, and Republicans used it to their advantage. With populism driving Republican politics today, many conservatives have embraced “classically liberal” as a descriptor for their ideology. The 19th-century emergence of liberal political theory from the writings of people such as John Stuart Mill centered on the core principle of individual freedom. Liberalism also meant respecting free and fair elections, adhering to the rule of law, and having a healthy respect for institutions tasked with safeguarding those ideals as well as their people.
It is political illiberalism, not partisanship, that’s tearing at the fabric of our republic. Both the Republican Party and the Democratic Party have recently proposed or engaged in stratagems that run counter to liberalism and instead are content to govern in the fashion of an ochlocracy, or mob rule.
The Democrats are under increasing pressure to do away with the legislative filibuster. With only a tiebreaking “majority” in the Senate, if Majority Leader Chuck Schumer cannot find ways to work around the rules to move legislation through the chamber, the trillions of dollars President Joe Biden wants to spend won’t see his desk for a signature. To try and find popular support in the country for ending the filibuster, they have resorted to dishonest arguments, claiming that the filibuster is a “relic of the Jim Crow era.” This, of course, ignores the fact the Democrats made plenty of use of the filibuster last year, including using it to block South Carolina Sen. Tim Scott’s police reform bill. Some Democrats and other activities have resorted to using such puerile phrases as the “tyranny of the minority.”
Democratic Sens. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona and West Virginia’s Joe Manchin have repeatedly said they do not favor ending the filibuster. Naturally, the press continues to ask them at every turn. It’s getting to the point where reporters no longer seem to be looking for information from them but instead appear almost to be leading a lobbying effort to get them to fall in line.
The push for passage of the For The People Act, dishonestly framed by Democrats (and the press) as “voting rights” legislation, would effectively federalize our electoral system, remove redistricting from state legislatures, and hinder free speech by forcing disclosure of donors who make high-dollar donations to 501(c)4 organizations at the mere mention of a federal official in an ad, even if it has no ties to an election.
Republicans have issues with advancing illiberalism as well. The calls to regulate Google, Apple, Twitter, Facebook, and Amazon are little more than appeals to populist anger based on the bogus notion that conservatives are “getting silenced” by Big Tech or via deceptive language regarding Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act.
J.D. Vance, the author of Hillbilly Elegy and a possible Senate candidate in Ohio, has proposed taxing corporations and regulating Google because it has “too much power.” When reminded by Tucker Carlson that Google is a private company, Vance replied, “I don’t care.” The attempt to equate the power of several corporations with that of the federal government relies on appealing to emotions more than reason, whipping up mob anger (such as silly suggestions to regulate third-party fact-checkers) as a replacement for sound political proposals and ideas.
No example, however, can contend with the light-speed run toward illiberalism than the refusal by Donald Trump and many other Republicans, both at the state and federal level, to accept the results of the 2020 election. Many people, particularly those in Trump-friendly media, mask their contempt for the results under the guise of saying the election was “unfair.” Others are upfront in their declaration the election was “stolen.” House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy at once claimed no one is talking about the election but still backed Liz Cheney’s ouster as House conference chairwoman for telling the truth about who won last November and the costs of denial.
When confronted on their illiberalism, Republicans often retreat to describing “problems” with the election and turning it on Democrats, asking, “What are they afraid of?” It’s a wink and nod to the very same people who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 following Trump’s ranting and while Republicans were challenging the certification of Joe Biden’s win.
There are no easy solutions. But as long as politicians in both parties continue to thumb their noses at institutions, the rule of law, and federalism while increasing their embrace of ochlocracy, it will only get worse.
