This week I want to talk about the nature of democracy and the relationship with the political elite and authority. I have been thinking a lot about politicians and the critical place of authority in the functioning of a healthy democracy. Certainly it's true that there must be a balance between, on the one hand, believing that every state action is a conspiracy against our freedom and, on the other, being completely deferential to the state. Somewhere between these two extremes there must be a certain amount of trust in the genuineness of our leaders and the rule of law that safeguards our liberty.
A number of times over this last week I have been led to consider this balance and to wonder at why there has been such a decline of deference in society and the challenges that such a decline could mean to our democratic ideals.
I was listening to a Ted Talk by Rory Stewart entitled, "Why Democracy Matters." Stewart is a British Parliamentarian elected to office in 2010. He is a Conservative and an author. Stewart argues that democracy is more than just 'instrumental or structural." He says that democracy has a value in and of itself and that to reinvigorate democracy there must be a new pact between the politicians and the public. Stewart's talk speaks to the power of democracy itself to redefine the relationship between politicians and citizens. Democracy should mean that we can reinvigorate dialogue. He says that democracy allows for politicians to listen to citizens and for there to be open and honest dialogue. Stewart notes that there is something wrong with the fact that there has been a real decline of respect for the political elite and he notes that the role has become "profoundly diminished."
In this state of distrust we have seen a shift in political culture in which rights have become the cornerstone of democracy. A number of scholars have pointed to this shift in political culture including Michael Ignatieff who delivered a Massey Lecture in 2000 entitled "The Rights Revolution." His lecture traced the rise of rights as the central tenet of democracy in political culture. Certainly it is easy to assume that rights do frame the foundation of liberal democracies but it is also critical that citizens accept responsibility for understanding that individual liberty must be balanced with broader security.
This issue came to mind again when I read an article by Neil Macdonald of the CBC entitled, "Contempt of cop, America's defiance revolution" in which Macdonald analyses a new trend of civil disobedience which puts into question the authority of state officials. It is complicated to explain but briefly the issue is that individuals are now resisting questioning at roadblocks on the grounds of invasion of privacy. You can see many of these encounters on YouTube because individuals are recording the confrontation on cell phones. The roadblocks are considered legal but the court has said that individuals can refuse to answer questions. These acts of defiance are predicated on the idea that individuals have a right to go from place to place unimpeded by state authority. The assertion seems to be that the right is more critical than the security. It is possible that these roadside checks may have very little security outcomes and state authorities should have to demonstrate the effectiveness of the roadside checks. But if they are found to be effective then what responsibility is required of a citizen to comply?
These issues have certainly become more acute since technology has opened to door to wider surveillance. Edward Snowden certainly opened the door to questions about the balance between security and privacy. In Barack Obama's speech about changes to the NSA he said: "Given the unique power of the state, it is not enough for leaders to say: trust us, we won't abuse the data we collect. For history has too many examples when that trust has been breached. Our system of government is built on the premise that our liberty cannot depend on the good intentions of those in power; it depends upon the law to constrain those in power."
While he is correct, I think there is a danger is dismissing the role of trust as part of democracy. There is a serious problem when deference is lost and when it is replaced with a rights culture.
