Can Democracy Survive Humanity?

Here's the theory: As people become more intelligent, their judgments become sounder. Thus are they able to govern themselves better. Their choices are reflected in the governments they have.

The smarter people are, then, the better democracy, the ultimate challenge of governing, can work. Look at the USA.

Okay, look. Look carefully. We have a greater percentage of college-educated people among us than ever before. Our politicians, especially those in our nation's capitol, have at least bachelor's degrees if not law school certifications, which are considered equivalent to Ph.Ds. All the members of the Supreme Court are from Yale or Harvard.

And democracy is in deeper trouble here than it has been since the Civil War. If we aren't careful, the abortion issue, soon to come to a head, will result in another one. People are bailing out on democracy, leaving decisions in the hands of one man and one group, and not seeming to mind it at all. Instead of reining in power, too many are passively permitting it to take over.

As a result, more and more, anger and emotionalism have taken over this land. As a greater percentage of people become better educated, reason and rationality are supposed to overcome emotionality as bases of judgment and action.

But they aren't. We're supposed to make better decisions than we've made 50 years ago. We're supposed to adjust better to the world we have made.

Have we? How are we doing with respect to climate change? To evolving roles of women and men? To immigration challenges, which grow greater by the day? To economic challenges, including the lingering aftermath of the recession, now ten years ago? To extending world peace?

The problems of the present day are no more and no less a reflection of our common humanity, and what remains some of its greatest drawbacks: Lack of perspective caused by ignorance or rejection of history. Selfishness. The lust for power. Racial condescension. Inability to adjust to technological changes--stem cell research, social media, and automation, to name a few--which drive social and cultural change whether we like it or not.

The word that defines 'democracy' best is, I believe, together. We can, and I believe must, find solutions together--the ones that an overwhelming number can live with. That word is another one essential to the maintenance of democracy--consensus. That's a word we no longer seem to be reaching for.

Democracies operate by majority rule, but the best of them accept and leave room for the loyal opposition. 45 does none of that. He insults and lies about those who oppose him. He crushes people beneath him, or he believes he does. His party is fine with that.

Brett Kavanaugh was anything but a consensus choice for the Supreme Court. It is a reflection of the wrong person being president at the wrong time (Would there ever be a right or good time for him?), someone who demands his own way at the expense of the general public's peace of mind. It was a naked power grab, which, now completed, will only result in more insults and more anger to follow. But he is also a natural growth of what the Republican Party has become (or has always been, research and extrapolation to follow)--a cutthroat, vicious, power-hungry group bent on domination because their ideas, as they well know but cannot admit to themselves, cannot otherwise survive the scrutiny of time and tide, and cannot and will not bend to changes that are right in front of them.

Democracy is supposed to work this out. It is supposed to weed out this awfulness and replace it with something more palatable--reflecting, as Lincoln said, "the better angels of our nature" (an appeal which, at the edge of the Civil War, fell unaddressed). In 28 days, we will see how well that will work.