The best way to fix a democracy

Surveys tell us that people around the world are not too enthusiastic about democracies, but few want to change to a different form of government. The change voters do want? Better politicians who listen to constituents and act ethically.

|
Matt Rourke/AP/File
A statue of Benjamin Franklin graces The Franklin Institute in Philadelphia. He participated in the 1787 Constitutional Congress.

A woman in Australia, it turns out, knows exactly what is needed to fix democracy. "There should be longer terms of government to promote longer-term vision," she told a recent survey by the Pew Research Center. That makes sense. People need time to make big changes. 

But wait. A man in the United States is equally sure that he, too, knows exactly what is needed to fix democracy. "I believe term limits on senators and representatives in government would greatly improve our process of democracy. Career politicians must end," he told the survey.

OK, so maybe that's not it. Maybe the solution is somewhere else. Maybe the way to better-functioning democracies is fewer parties. "We need fewer parties, less fragmentation, and more concrete debate," a woman in the Netherlands told the survey. That sounds logical enough.

Alas, no. At least for a man in Spain, what democracy needs is more parties. "There is too much pressure on having two big parties compete with each other. It should be open to more parties," he said.

Survey after survey tells us that people around the world are currently not too enthusiastic about democracies. Very few want to change to a different form of government, Pew finds. But they really would like their democracy to function a little better, please.

No. 1 on most people's lists: better politicians who listen to voters and act ethically.

Is that really too much to ask? 

No one solution could possibly address the diversity of the world's many democracies. The Netherlands does not face the same challenges as Nigeria, for instance. But the Pew survey, with all its intriguing prescriptions, does bring something universal to light. Every answer is a finger pointed somewhere else – at this institution or those people or that law. 

When Benjamin Franklin emerged from the last day of the Constitutional Convention in 1787, he said an interesting thing. Someone from the crowd asked if the convention had settled on a monarchy or a republic. "A republic," he answered, "if you can keep it."

Surely, that was a collective "you" – speaking to the people arrayed in front of him and those across the new country. But he could just as easily have been speaking to each individual. The job of maintaining and improving a democratic republic is collective but also individual. A democracy properly reflects its people. So for a democracy to improve, its people must improve. There is no other way. 

If we would have our democracies listen better, we must listen better. If we would have our democracies be more responsible, we must be more responsible. If we would have our democracies respect our rights, we must respect the rights of others. 

This is both the genius and the peril of democracy. It makes no claim to be anything other than what its people make it, and is therefore a mirror of the nation itself. And that means, in many cases, the very best way to improve a democracy is to improve oneself.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to The best way to fix a democracy
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/From-the-Editors/2024/0429/The-best-way-to-fix-a-democracy
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe