I’ve written several times recently about the importance of a broadly shared sense of the common good in order for democracy to flourish. It’s been the ongoing subject of conversation between me and friend Tom D., a retired professor of philosophy. We’ve come to the recognition that a broadly understood sense of the common good is lacking and is one reason why democracy is in jeopardy.
Many of today’s students, I am told, have no idea what a common good might be. Apparently they have been raised in an environment that lionizes individualism to the exclusion of any sense that the individual might have a duty to consider the common good ahead of one’s own desires. I’m unsure how true that is, but I see it pop up in higher education online posts. It certainly doesn’t mean commitment to a common good is absent from American society. There are many common goods, each expressed in a way limited to particular places, ideologies, and circles of like minded people. For example, we live in a small enclave of fifty townhouses and we share a strong sense of the common good for “The Close.” Fraternal orders and athletic teams understand what their common good is. Communities brought together by shared tragedy understand their common good, at least for the moment.
The common good of isolated neighborhoods and small like minded groups cannot add up to a national consensus about a greater national good but there have been times when one was broadly understood. The 20th century experienced several of those times. None were uncontested and each had a lifespan beyond which it could not hold. The Great Depression brought the New Deal which became a broadly shared understanding that “we were in it together” and the federal government was “our ally.” It was a broadly enough shared sense of the common good that FDR won elections by enormous margins. Just the same it did not go uncontested. Big business complained about creeping socialism interfering with their right to do whatever they wanted, however they wanted to do it. Fascists organizations promoted fear of immigrants, colored people and Jews as threats to white supremacy. In the end, the New Deal triumphed.
The WWII era united the country in a focussed determination to real threats to national security and Western democracy. What gave it a deep and lasting moral purpose were the Four Freedoms illuminated in FDR’s January 1941 address to Congress: Freedom of Speech, Freedom of Worship, Freedom from Want, Freedom from Fear. They were embedded in the American ethos by Norman Rockwell’s Saturday Evening Post covers depicting each freedom – paintings that even today remain icons of American values.
The war was followed by two decades during which the American Dream of ever greater prosperity for each succeeding generation became a possibility for all, a reality for many, and a sense that it was among the unalienable rights of (white) Americans. If the era was symbolic of a broadly shared sense of a national common good epitomized as The Life of Riley, Nelsons and Cleavers it was shattered by Vietnam and the Civil Rights movement. Nixon’s ignominious administration managed to corrode trust in the federal government as well. What has followed are decades of government portrayed as the problem that keeps Americans from enjoying what is rightfully theirs. What are rightfully theirs are their individual rights. Individualism has long been an American trait, but in recent decades it has become a dominant theme of political life. Rights are understood to adhere to the individual, not the community. What is rightfully mine is mine to be shared only with people like me. Communal rights accruing to the entire nation can lead only to communism, or so the propaganda says.
The trend is obvious. In a nation as diverse as ours, a sense of a national common good emerges when a genuine threat to national security or the livelihood of all is present. Such is a time we now face. The possibility that American democracy could fall to an authoritarian regime is a real and present danger. It would impose on the nation a demand to submit to a restrictive ideology demolishing the freedoms we have so long cherished and fought to retain. Some of its first victims would be the very people who now make up the MAGA base, lumping them in with unwanted immigrants and people of color. Moral justification would be achieved through the imposition of Christian nationalism replacing the traditional creeds of the church with an oath of allegiance to a political power. The obligation of orthodox Christians to see the face of God in every person, no matter who or what they might be, would become a threat to authorities, as would adherents of any other religion.
Uniting to defend American ideals behind the shield of a new broadly shared sense of the national common good would require that it be articulated simply, clearly, and be easily understood. Something drawn from the Declaration of Independence, preamble to the Constitution, the Gettysburg address, and FDR’s Four Freedoms would be a good place to start building a 21st century American dream in which it is broadly understood that one’s individual welfare depends on the general welfare of all, without discrimination.
Government of the people, by the people and for the people is the product of democracy, not authoritarianism. It must be fought for and defended, not with swords but words. Consider lessons from the run up to the adoption of the Constitution. It wasn’t clear that a strong democratic federal government could be a broadly shared common good. Proponents used the social media of the day to make their case. It took the form of speeches given in every possible venue and pamphlets put into the hands of as many people as possible. Newspapers were inundated with guest columns. Today’s social media must be employed with the same determination. To do less is to surrender. The alternative is to cede the battle to the propaganda skills of the MAGA leadership and their allies. Truth is never self evident. It must be made known through bold stands on behalf of the people.