This is a longer version of a Guest Editorial published in the Herald Times August 3, 2011.
Not many years ago P.J. O’Rourke boasted that, “A huge totalitarian system has been brought to its knees because nobody wants to wear Bulgarian shoes.” It seemed as if the combination of freedom, democracy and capitalism would inevitably prevail everywhere. But then something began to happen. According to Freedom House, the percentage of the world’s electoral democracies climbed steadily from 41% in 1989, when numbers were first computed, to peak at 64% in 2006. Since then there has been a steady decline in the numbers. Today we’re at 59%.*
There is a new political/economic model out there, and it’s got nothing to do with democracy. Shortly after the massacre at Tiananmen Square, the Communist Party launched a vast historical investigation into how political parties fall, and just as importantly, how they stay in power. This political hierarchy was utterly pragmatic. They had no political agenda other than staying in power. It was clear enough to these men, from observing the fates of Marcos, Honecker, Ceausescu and any number of other dictators, that even if they were promised amnesty before power was relinquished, it wouldn’t mean a thing as soon as power slipped from their fingers.
The conclusions were clear: corruption needed to be addressed, an ossified party structure needed to be replaced with technocrats and entrepreneurs, and all dissent, or anything that even looked like it might turn into dissent, needed to be ruthlessly quashed. Thus was born “market Stalinism”, a devastating cocktail of central planning, regulated capitalism, constant surveillance and merciless repression.
A system called “Golden Shield” was proposed, and is now largely in place, which will allow 24/7 observation of all citizens through networked cameras monitored remotely using facial recognition software. Phone calls will be listened to. Individuals will be identified with voice-recognition software with their positions pinpointed using GPS technology. This will be added to the monitoring of all internet activity, and finally stitched together by an overarching computer network capable of creating constantly updated dossiers on all Chinese citizens.
The Chinese people, however, do not appear to be upset by their government. The system has produced a phenomenal increase in material wealth. That has been crucial. According to a poll conducted by the Pew Research Center, 87% of all Chinese are “Satisfied by the way things are going.”
When the Berlin Wall fell, virtually everyone behind the “Iron Curtain” was stuck with dowdy clothes, shoddy goods, and a stupefying media. Today everything is different. Sexy videos with hot babes and passable rock and roll pour out of Russia, and young people throughout Central Europe are increasingly drawn to them (though American movies and music still have their allure). The few democratic institutions remaining in Russia are desperately under siege, but the glitter of a new consumerism appears far more compelling than a quarrelsome democracy.
So how important is freedom to most Americans? After 9-11 we seemed willing to give up a great deal of it with barely a whimper. Empowered by the Patriot Act, torture was “re-defined”, widespread warrantless wiretaps were winked at, and indefinite detention was instigated. We were famously told by Dick Cheney that we would have to occasionally work on the “dark side” if we expected to defeat terrorism. The Defense Department proposed that we build what was called “Total Information Awareness” by creating a constantly updated database on all US citizens, derived from banking, credit card, library and phone records, plus footage from surveillance cameras. Most, but not all of this was put on hold when it came to light. It saddens me, but I can’t help believing that many of my fellow citizens, the political heirs of Daniel Boone and Patrick Henry, would have supported the idea of it.
Today democracies all over the world seem to find it increasingly difficult to govern effectively due to a failure to reach consensus over even the most basic issues. India’s infrastructure is utterly inadequate, Japan barely muddles through under a deeply unpopular Prime Minister, Europe seems incapable of handling its debt problems, and the US is practically paralyzed by an inability to pass a reasonable budget. If democracies fail to deliver the goods and tyrannical regimes do, then the noble experiment of democracy will fail, and we’ll have no one to blame but ourselves.
*Many people feel that “The Arab Spring” will result in a resurgence of democracy in the Middle East. I’m skeptical. It hasn’t begun to play out yet. One thing we can learn from history is that when true revolutions (Americas was a war of independence) get rolling, power inevitably shifts to the most extreme factions. Examples of this are the Bolshiviks in Russia, the Jacobians in France and the Mullahs in Iran. The sweet hopes of democracy were lost as a result of a power vacuum and the resultant anarchy.
