History shows that diverse democracies are not easy to build or endure. Many of them devolve into majoritarian rule, or domination by a powerful minority, or break down. The survival of a diverse democracy becomes even more perilous at times when economic and technological developments further heighten insecurity and erode social solidarity.
This is the state in which many Western democracies find themselves right now. Existing diversity or the prospect of diversity in the wake of mass migration, along with the failure to produce shared prosperity, amidst transformational technological advances, are at the center of radical political shifts that favor polarization and threaten the future of liberal democracy. Diversity (ethnic, religious, racial) and insecurity driven by economic and technological dislocation are conditions that in fact normalize polarization. To overcome it we need to develop a mutual understanding as to what these conditions mean for everyone and then find and promote more inclusive solutions.
This seems to be the message in Yascha Mounk’s valuable book “The Great Experiment: Why Diverse Democracies Fall Apart and How They Can Endure.” Diversity is challenging because it triggers the human tendency for groupthink that separates people into Us and Them. Ethnic origin, religion, and race are the usual drivers of such separation into groups. Mounk suggests that to give primacy to the authority of groups over the rights of the individual is dangerous for democracy and its underlying liberalism. This is so because the respect for rights shifts from the individual to the group so that in the end a democratic state is less an association of citizens and more an association of associations, which can lead to fragmentation.
The challenge of diversity originates when a dominant group in a democratic state (like the Western European White Protestants in the case of America) start feeling that their cultural, religious, and political power is threatened by new incoming groups. In other words, the dominant group puts more stock in the prospect of ending up with a state of competing interest groups than in the prospect of coming together under a common set of civic values and national aspirations. The fear of the consequences of diversity has been part of America’s history since the emancipation of Black people and has continued as waves of immigrants have added to the diversity of the country.
In recent decades feelings toward diversity have created a great deal of tension for American democracy as the specter of a soon to materialize majority-minority demographic reality is supposed to put an end to the power of White America. Against this oft-repeated prediction, Mounk argues (and the evidence supports him) that the promotion of the majority-minority demographic inevitability is the most dangerous idea in the current context of American politics. It is dangerous, first, because it incentivizes those who value the present White majority to resort to measures that thwart the voting rights of those who are assumed to be part of the majority-minority. And, second, because it engenders strident opposition to immigrants who are projected to become members of the majority-minority.
Both Republicans and Democrats are to blame for promoting the inevitability of the majority-minority prospect. Republicans use it to galvanize a base of citizens who by their socio-economic status are most vulnerable to any competition from new comers. The Democrats have relied on the same prospect (that presumably favors them) at the expense of paying attention to the real issues faced by working-class Americans. The interesting thing though is that reality is proving both Republicans and Democrats wrong. Growing numbers of voters who are part of the majority-minority are showing to be a much more fluid political force, thus, undercutting the belief that a future majority-minority will advantage the Democrats. Since 2016 greater, than previously, percentages of minority voters have shifted to the Republicans than the Democrats and especially when it comes to the presidential ticket. This fluidity in political choices is good for the American democracy and good for the country. Nothing can kill a democracy faster than the fear of a group of citizens that they will for ever be excluded from power.
The reality on the ground, Mounk argues, should give us optimism that diversity does not undermine social cohesion and patriotism. Within a few generations new immigrants integrate themselves in their new country whether it is in a linguistic and educational sense or social mobility. And they do not lag other Americans in their trust of national institutions. Mounk argues that neither the “melting pot” (implying full assimilation) is realistic nor the “salad bowl” (remaining distinct of each other) is desirable. Instead, he proposes that we all meet in the public square of civic engagement in pursuit of the common core values of American democracy of justice, liberty, and dignity for all.
Nonetheless, we need to understand that diversity at a time of economic insecurity and transformational technologies are valid factors in explaining the concerns and fears of those who are the most vulnerable to them. It is also understandable why free trade, mobility of jobs, and technological innovations are less threatening to those who by education and skills or family privilege can navigate a fast moving and complex world. But if these “privileged” classes are to preserve a democratic and liberal order, they ought to recognize the predicament of those who feel threatened and work together to realize win-win solutions.
Democracy is a difficult political system because it demands of its citizens to have a high degree of trust that their fellow citizens will respect their rights and that the power to govern is a possibility open to all. This trust is not easy to maintain when waves of demographic, cultural, economic, and technological changes recast the relative power of different groups of citizens. The faster these changes happen, as the case is in advanced countries, the more the loyalty of citizens to democracy is tested.
To avoid a rapture, we need to try to understand each other’s fears and aspirations. This has a greater chance to happen in societies where civic engagement brings together people from many and diverse walks of life.
Let's Reason 