Idealism and realism in the politics of democracy The Norman Transcript January 06, 2007 12:15 am — For The Transcript Like so many of our words and ideas, democracy is rooted in classical culture. "Demos" signifies "people" and "kratos" signifies "authority," so democracy is rule by the people. Few ironies could be more graphic than the gift of this word and concept from a people whose society was slave-based and authoritarian. The ancients also gave us "idealism" and "realism" which carry a highly technical meaning in philosophy as well as the general meaning which we now give to them. "Idealism" indicates concern for some higher good and "realism" shows concern for things as they actually are. Idealism runs through Greek thought, but their philosophers were realists and were generally skeptical of the ability of the masses and the wisdom of democracy. Advocates of democracy everywhere tend to be optimistic -- often excessively optimistic. Many of their assumptions are debatable. Democratic partisans believe the great majority of people want self-government. Maybe. In theory or in practice? The former requires only verbal assent; the latter requires undeceived insight, will and determination. It also requires understanding that democracy calls for more intelligence than authoritarian systems, and that dodging problems from fear or selfishness produces only further confusion. Most of us assume democracy is a just system. But the manner in which we conduct the democratic process should have a sobering influence on the idealist. True, many fair minded people participate; many wise decisions are reached; many competent people are elected to office. Nevertheless the machinery and consequences of the process are frequently less sanguine. Regrettably our relatively uncritical view of politics glosses over many troublesome realities. Much electioneering and numerous elections are studies in exaggeration, chicanery and misrepresentation. Propaganda, especially reiterated platitudes or manipulated statistics, shapes opinion in ways contrary to things as they are. Prejudice often obstructs the rational practice of democracy and juvenile wrangling often accompanies electioneering, so attention to justice easily gets lost in the squabbling. The advocates of democracy assume the public -- all of us, average guys and the gifted -- can understand the problems of our times. The facts seem to be that social-economic-scientific-industrial complexity has outrun our capacity to understand and control. What better illustrations can one find than the Vietnamese War and the Iraq War? They were concocted and run by the best political and military minds and in both instances reality was completely misunderstood. The same holds for nuclear energy. Even our best intellects do not know what to do with growing nuclear waste and proliferating bombs. So we blindly generate more of both. We assume so much that is open to question. At least since Jefferson we have told ourselves we are born free and equal, but these vary being dependent on family, social status, money, race, education and genes. Inequality is inevitable; freedom is restricted by biological, environmental and economic factors. We assert one opinion is as good as another. This is debatable. The only opinion worthy of attention is informed opinion. Still this wrangle translates into the theory that our votes are equal. Arithmetically, yes. But does it make sense for the village vagabond to cancel the vote of the town physician or the teacher of biology when the issue is one of medical science? One of our self-made and scarcely recognized traps is a product of complexity: the more complex our world becomes the smaller the percentage of people who understand it. And we cannot agree on who they are or whether their affirmations are true. The result is disorder and confusion. Further damaging the democratic process are vested interests ever alert to their own advantage. One strength of democracy is the free flow of information, but we are burdened with a manipulated press and media whose owners are not necessarily averse to injecting misinformation where fact is critical. Money can and sometimes
does corrupt those who disseminate information. This leads to distortion and blurred reality. Such things are disruptive, wasteful and they confuse the issues. Perhaps worst of all they elevate emotions above reason. A workable democracy requires a realistic grasp of the world. Like it or not all the countries of the world are unstable. How much is only a question of degree. Virtually all suffer from overcrowding, psychological stress, diminishing resources, poorly integrated institutions, excessive discrepancies in wealth, emotional immaturity, fear, greed and information-educational systems that fall to bring the public and politicians face to face with reality. We should not deceive ourselves politically, for these problems are not primary political party problems. They are not necessarily caused by any one group, not Democrats, Republicans, Communists, Moslems, Christians, Jews, Blacks or whites, although such groups can exacerbate them. They are caused by all of us, and if they are to be solved this will result from cooperation and the collective use of intelligence. The Achilles heel of democracy is psychological-philosophical: ill informed minds, fear and selfishness. Our compulsion to win in the market place or the political arena, which means acquiring money and commanding authority, often deflects our judgment and dulls our concern. Such weaknesses italicize the fact that democracy requires a mature public -- intellectually, morally and emotionally. Participants in a democratic society must see, however distasteful, the social and economic conditions as they actually are. And this means they must see that political rights do not necessarily yield economic justice. When we do not use idealism to illuminate realism we suffer a serious deprivation. The underlying cause of this mistake is the spiritual-philosophical erosion of America. Evidences are abundant: the unreflective embrace of materialism; uncritical acceptance of evangelical political certitude for quiet religious faith; unexamined acceptance of dogmas -- political, economic and clerical -- from self-appointed authorities and the rejection of the fruits and possibilities of scientific method. Generally the temptation of those in power is to take whatever steps may be necessary to maintain that power. Even in a healthy democratic state, where violence tends to be minimum, efforts to ambush the opposition politically by straining the truth tend toward the maximum. To keep idealism from obstructing realism, and realism from overwhelming idealism, we need an open society and open government. One condition for advancing these ends is a Democratic-Republican minded public that can recognize the specious aspects of political discourse. Much of what passes for serious political discussion in America has the value of counterfeit money and the reliability of thin ice. One result is political indifference and cynicism. And this is why teachers and parents must cultivate youthful intellects to see the difference between fact and fiction and to discipline their characters to support what is humane rather than selfish. In final analysis, no system is likely to survive unless it is realistic. Idealism lifts our vision while realism requires the identification of life with tragedy. Only when one thinks long-term does this vision become clear. The time will come -- perhaps eons from now or possibly sooner than we imagine -- when all we have built will pass. Even such marvels as the Golden Gate Bridge will disintegrate into nuclear dust or slip into the Bay and be forgotten. The tragic vision more than any other moves us to a sense of fellow feeling and habitual concern for truth, and these make democracy possible. Without them democracy erodes into some form of authoritarianism or perhaps the grossest kind of tyranny. Lloyd Williams is a retired educator. He publishes monthly in The Transcript. Copyright © 1999-2008 cnhi, inc.