Generational Change: The Game of Democracy

Editors note: This article is part of a Serial for members only, "How Generational Change is Changing America." You can read the original post "Is It Really Okay Boomer?" here.

I entered into political journalism back in the late 80s, which I guess makes this the fifth decade for me in the field. I started by writing a local newspaper covering the issues that mattered to any bratty little kid playing tag through the neighborhood. It was only distributed to like ten 8-year-old neighbors, but it was one of my first steps in thought-provoking journalism. Even then, I knew the pen was mightier than the sword, as was the dot matrix printer I used mightier than the projectile balls of dirt piled in my dug-out fort. I don't know if Edward Bulwer-Lytton thought about dot matrix printers when he coined the famous phrase, but he would have agreed.

I was politically active off of the page, too. I was a likely ring leader among my neighborhood friends and siblings, so if I wanted to make the rules for our dirt ball war games, I could. But I knew that I needed to consider what every other kid wanted. Not only because I would have to face them every day but because our games were far more fun when everyone compromised enough to agree on what the game was and a basic set of rules. It was our little form of democracy, and we liked it for the most part because even if everyone didn't get their way, we all had a voice in the outcome. For most generations in living memory, this philosophy has been the prevailing idea.

In the 90s, Generation X lifted up democracy by creating entire music festivals and TV marathons where everyone lauded the fact that the power of one's vote mattered. To Gen Xers, democracy was celebrated like the life-changing innovation of email, something you would go out of your way to get 180 hours of access to, or at least to the mailbox every couple of weeks. Email at the time may have only been an easier way to turn a business rival into an online romance, a la You've Got Mail, but we all knew it would become something we couldn't live without. Your voice mattered whether it was expressed in an AOL chat room or through the chads on a voter ballot, hanging or otherwise.

To the Boomer generation, Democracy was so popular it was as ubiquitous as SPAM in everyday life. The two were nearly synonymous. One had a shelf life of hundreds of years, and the other was bursting in flavor thanks in part to salt. Either way, we knew we would never starve in the event of a nuclear disaster if we stocked up on both, and we were certain that should that day come, we would do whatever it takes to keep both in supply.

The Greatest Generation knew what it was like to fight for SPAM and democracy. The USA, in the era of World War II, presented itself as the Arsenal of Democracy, arming those fighting for the same. Eventually, while hesitant, America supplied its soldiers with the "Special Army Meat" and joined the world war. We joined for the sole purpose of defending the ideal of democracy or removing those from power who wanted to destroy it. Democracy wasn't just a game played among kids any more than SPAM was ham that didn't pass its physical. It was our whole economic focus, and it was life or death.

Times have changed. Today, email has turned into the giant plant from Little Shop of Horrors and is screaming, "feed me!". We're approaching it every day, with full intent to walk away from it for the weekend, only to find out it just keeps getting bigger. And SPAM has turned into more emails, never satisfying the salty cravings of our inboxes.

Democracy is experiencing some of the same troubles. We use the word as an assumed characteristic of our system of government, but it doesn't have the luster that minced meats had in the 40s and 50s, and we're not checking it every five minutes to see if the girl you met at some retail store decided to write you back.

But we are checking it every five minutes. What you are checking for may depend on your views, but I'd say that most of us want to make sure Democracy is still something that comes along with citizenship – at no extra charge. And when we go into the voting booth come November, we would like to know that it was worth our time, and everyone on the receiving end will feel the same. That doesn't seem to be the case. Today, stolen elections are being predicted by candidates who want to make sure they have an alternative if following the rules doesn't give them the results they want. Others are trying to change the rules, some to make it harder to vote, some to make it harder to delete someone's vote.

Democracy is not being tested. It's not on trial by fire. It is gasping for air, and it's on life support. Democracy is actually in danger.

Perhaps it's more exact to say it is just not as popular as it has been in the past. Should the prevailing opinions of the people determine who their government is anymore? It seems there are a large number of people who are leaning against it, at least in practice. Someone taking this approach in my childhood games would have been called a bully. Today, we call them politicians. Many of them, still playing games. Some, not playing by the rules.

Playing By The Rules

Here in the states, democracies' health problems showed up most prominently after the landslide loss of Donald Trump in his reelection campaign when he attempted to overthrow the election while marching his armed supporters to the Capitol. But his antics go way back to his days on The Apprentice.

Back in April of 2016, Trump began hatching his rigged election claims before he landed the Republican nomination. Ted Cruz, the greasy candidate running against him in the primaries at the time, criticized Trump sharply for his election denialism in a conversation with Glenn Beck. But as always, things change when someone wins the election.

I would have assumed that Ted liked a southern scramble, but now we see he's a bigger fan of the huevos of Goldilox himself, those which, after a landslide loss for reelection, seem to be easier to find in Ted's mouth when they're not being re-truthed on Truth Social.

Ted has since become the subject of a lawsuit (he's in good company with his papaw Trump) aimed at those who played a leading role in attempts to overturn the 2020 election. Ted may be a ringleader, but he is hardly alone. Today, 1 in 3 Republican candidates support claims of election fraud, and to see in great detail, Bloomberg highlights 257 candidates who supported Trump's false election claims, complete with receipts. It's easier to find a republican flaunting disproven election lies than it is to find a conservative one.

This isn't a problem with American Politics. This is a political opportunity. One that the global right has acted on across the world.

Democracy Across The World

From the borders of Russia to the elections of South America, liberal democracy is in question. In Brazil, the current President, Jair Bolsonaro, is using the same playbook as his mentor did in the USA to retain his power. Ironically, the fuel enabling corrupt politicians to deploy their undermining tactics comes from their voters. Bolsonaro, who lost a first-round election by 6 million votes, has claimed election fraud. It is ironic to vote for a candidate whose goal is to erase the power of your vote, but the rise of support aids in propping up the lies with information campaigns to maintain momentum. Despite Bolsonaro's unfounded claims of election rigging, he still has a substantial following, not enough to win an election, but enough to deny its legitimacy.

Support for democracy has declined by ten percentage points since 2004 across the Americas, according to a study by The Conversation. Meanwhile, authoritarian figures are gaining support, like those seen in Peru, El Salvador, and the recent election in Brazil. And, of course, the United States. According to the report, "A growing number of people view their elections, and their elected representatives, as flawed and untrustworthy." As I explained in an article from last week, "Maybe You Should Have a Drink," people will believe whatever you tell them if it supports their worldview. This distrust grants power-hungry predators the means to erode democracy itself.

As Freedom House studies the topic of liberal democracy, they say that in recent years, "authoritarian regimes have become more effective at co-opting or circumventing the norms and institutions meant to support basic liberties, and at providing aid to others who wish to do the same." They find democratic countries like the USA in steady decline in their rankings as a democracy over the last 16 years.

But this is just a longstanding problem rearing its head in the mainstream. As Putin invades sovereign countries to take land and conducts sham elections at gunpoint to create a false narrative of public support, constituencies across the world support him – or are slow to act. I've argued for more and not less action against Putin.

As the New York Times has reported in detail, efforts to discredit elections or avoid them with armed conflict have been showing up across the world and have been embraced by the global right. I'll provide an excerpt here:

Soon after the F.B.I. searched Donald J. Trump’s home in Florida for classified documents, online researchers zeroed in on a worrying trend.

Posts on Twitter that mentioned “civil war” had soared nearly 3,000 percent in just a few hours as Mr. Trump’s supporters blasted the action as a provocation. Similar spikes followed, including on Facebook, Reddit, Telegram, Parler, Gab and Truth Social, Mr. Trump’s social media platform. Mentions of the phrase more than doubled on radio programs and podcasts, as measured by Critical Mention, a media-tracking firm.

Posts mentioning “civil war” jumped again a few weeks later, after President Biden branded Mr. Trump and “MAGA Republicans” a threat to “the very foundations of our republic” in a speech on democracy in Philadelphia.

Now experts are bracing for renewed discussions of civil war, as the Nov. 8 midterm elections approach and political talk grows more urgent and heated.

More than a century and a half after the actual Civil War, the deadliest war in U.S. history, “civil war” references have become increasingly commonplace on the right. While in many cases the term is used only loosely — shorthand for the nation’s intensifying partisan divisions — observers note that the phrase, for some, is far more than a metaphor.

Polling, social media studies and a rise in threats suggest that a growing number of Americans are anticipating, or even welcoming, the possibility of sustained political violence, researchers studying extremism say. What was once the subject of serious discussion only on the political periphery has migrated closer to the mainstream.

But while that trend is clear, there is far less agreement among experts about what it means.

But what it does mean is that the main street talk about civil war is no longer a casual reference. Perhaps the original Civil War started similarly, much like the January 6th riots, which were found to have started as casual online banter.

So, what came first? The Chicken or the Eggs?

Sorry to call Ted Cruz a chicken, but his flip from rebuking false election claims to promoting the idea as leverage reaks of sulfur and poultry droppings. Our generation has elected him and others like him. A generation much different than those before it. I'd like to say our generation still wants democracy, but we have forgotten what it looks like. My suggestion is if you hear messages from those who would attack the institution simply to have their way with it, it's time to mark them as SPAM.