Al Dahler

PERSPECTIVE

We Americans love to talk about democracy. The speeches of presidential candidates are filled with references to democracy, the democratic way of life, the rights, privileges and responsibilities of our democratic nation. The president in his State of the Union address referred to democracy in its domestic and international context.

We Americans proudly declare that we live in the world's greatest democracy. We see ourselves as missionaries of democracy to the rest of the world. When America conquered the Philippines during the Spanish-American War, the promise was that we would help the Filipino people achieve the blessings of democracy. We were intent to bring democracy to Vietnam, among other countries, in the 1960s and 1970s. In the 1990s we were busy advocating democracy for Russia and the Eastern European countries. Today we are convinced that promoting democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq will change the Middle East from a bellicose to a benign region. We talk incessantly about democracy, but do we really understand its possibilities and its limitations?

What, then, does the concept of democracy signify? The dictionary defines democracy as government by the people exercised either directly or through elected representatives. Our Constitution is prefaced by, "We, the people …" proclaiming that ultimately you and I, the citizens of this country, are in charge. One textbook defines democracy as a form of government within which each one of us who meets the citizenship and voting requirements may, as individuals, participate in making decisions that affect our lives. There are many more ways to define democracy, but definitions are really inconsequential. Harold Laswell, the eminent political scientist, has stated that, "Government is always government of the few, whether in the name of the few, the one or the many."

Anyone who has been active in political, social, economic or religious organizations can attest to Dr. Laswell's contention. For many various reasons, leadership groups always emerge to govern, to exercise decision-making powers, to carry out required activities, to organize and to keep organizations functioning. The mass of membership is usually content to just be, to follow, to enjoy the labors of the leadership group.

Ancient Athens, which is considered the "cradle of democracy," was strictly ruled by a small group of males who qualified as citizens and who had the leisure time available to sit in the assembly to debate the issues, make decisions and govern the populace at large. British political history, from which evolved many of the ideas that support our governmental structure, has always been dominated by elites variously composed from the titled aristocracy, the business and merchant classes or the working-class leadership.

Our Founding Fathers realized, when writing the Constitution, that public well-being depends on a few conscientious public-minded individuals who associate their prosperity and happiness - the good life - with the prosperity and happiness of the people as whole.

As our country progressed, more and more people were given the right to vote, to elect our representatives. But still, in each election, we always empower a few to govern for us - the many, the people. In reality, direct rule by the people is not practicable or possible because most of us do not have the expertise, the knowledge, the time, the fiscal resources or make the effort to actively participate in every political decision that affects our lives.

Therefore, since governance is always by the few, the most important factor in our democratic representative form of government is trust - trust between the people and their elected officials. Trust is an element in every relationship. It is the essential element in politics.

How do we go about building this relationship of trust? We build it by electing representatives worthy of our trust. The Chinese philosopher Mencius taught that the following characteristics are indispensable in those entrusted to rule:

- "Benevolence, which is always to think first of what is good for the people;

- "Righteousness, which is not to do to your subjects what you would not want them to do to you if you were in their place;

- "Propriety, which is always to behave with courtesy and respect toward your subjects;

- "Wisdom, which is guided by knowledge and understanding; and

- "Sincerity, which is to be sincere and truthful in all you do."

In this election year, every candidate will try to convince us that he/she possesses these characteristics, that he/she is trustworthy to govern in the interest of his/her constituents. Since most of the information about candidates comes to us through media advertising, it is well to remember that all political advertising is self-serving. It is advertising paid for by the candidates, their friends and supporting special-interest groups.

How, then, do we go about discerning the real character of candidates from the sanctimonious images projected? Every candidate has a history. To uncover it takes a lot of research work - work which takes time and effort and which few people, while struggling with demands of daily life, are willing or able to expend.

But help is easily available through Project Vote Smart. The project provides candidate information on issue positions, campaign contributors, voting records, biological histories and performance evaluations from over 100 liberal and conservative organizations. The project covers national as well as candidates running for state offices. The information is available at no cost on the Web at http://www.vote-smart.org or by calling 1-888-VoteSmart (868-3762).

Al Dahler is a retired Air Force officer and former private school administrator. He currently serves as the chaplain at Torrington Community Hospital and Care Center.