The choice of leadership in a democracy is supposed to be choices between good people differing in tactics and approaches rather than democracy and anti-democratic fervor that is rising in many parts of the world, including our own here in USA. Over time if democratic institutions become less active, citizens become indifferent or pre-occupied with other demands of life and the foundation of truth and justice among the aspiring leaders become a less and less relevant, then we get into starker times. The very foundation of democracy becomes shaky, and it becomes a snow-ball effect across communities and nations. Whether it is gun violence, racial inequity, white supremacy, wealth gap or corporate greed, we tend to lose grip on democracy if we side with positions that treat people unjustly, prioritize special interests over common interests and blur the lines between truth and falsehood.
The active support of US and European democracies in the acts of violence against innocent civilians in Gaza and the collective ineptitude in containing Russian aggression against Ukraine result in moral bankruptcy and failure to advance cause of democracy at home and across nations. Recent anti-democratic repression in countries like Venezuela, Pakistan, Bangladesh, rising communal sentiments in democracies like India and far right anti-immigrant rhetoric in Europe – are all indications of democracy on the defense.
US election in November will be a litmus test to see how we work to restore democracy in our own land. A candidate that says he will only accept the results if he wins is a clear affront to democracy. A court that offers immunity to a President because of his position is an affront to democracy. A part of law enforcement that continues to racially profile its citizens and kills/imprisons disproportionately is an affront to democracy. An economy that favors the rich against the poor is an affront to democracy. A society that restricts mobility on the economic ladder for the poor is an affront to democracy. This list goes on in our country.
An active and engaged citizenship that participates in civil discourse, questions falsehood rather than promote it, protects truth as a precious commodity and continually tries to diminish the power and influence of money and special interests in electing our public representatives is sorely missed today. The candidacy of a female candidate with immigrant and racial minority roots, and background in rule of law is perhaps one such opportunity where we as country can demonstrate our love for democracy and deny groups that propagate racial, economic and religious extremism at its worst. Let the ballot box be the balance on which such competing views are weighted and weeded out.
