By Michael Randall
In 1911, German-born sociologist Robert Michels described what he called “the Iron Law of Oligarchy” to which all human societies must succumb, including representative democracies like our own. The “iron law of oligarchy” states that, “All forms of human organizations, regardless of how democratic they may be at the start, will eventually and inevitably develop oligarchic tendencies, thus making true democracy practically and theoretically impossible, especially in large groups and complex organizations.” (Thank you, AI, for this definition.)
In any complex human society, many ambitious people aspire toward (and often acquire) political, financial, and economic leadership positions. Often, overtime, they (and their successors) become more helpful to friends and associates and others like themselves, and less so to the people they are meant to serve. They become more self-absorbed, seek more routine in their work, more comforts and ease. Their interest in, and contact with, the people whom they govern declines.
America has descended into an oligarchy overseen by major corporations, large banks, US Presidents, the courts, and civil servants. Congress is largely ineffectual, with many of its members more interested in smearing each other and posturing before television cameras than in solving problems. Unclear as the rest of us are regarding how to correct this situation, we go to war not upon those sources of oligarchy, but upon each other.
Thanks to social media, millions of us feel threatened by folks who don’t share our political opinions, so we try to set them straight and simultaneously display our own virtue by spewing hateful venom at them, all the while hiding incognito (and cowardly) behind our computers.
We support politicians who promise more government spending but no new taxes to pay for it, even though with our ever-ignored, ever-expanding national debt we know we are dancing along the edge of the abyss, and sooner or later will plunge into it. Will it then be the USA’s turn to “go under,” as other human societies have before?
Neither of the two major parties’ current presidential candidates addresses that likely outcome. How could they possibly win the presidency by challenging our shallow thinking, and leading us toward more personal responsibility, neighborliness, and financial discipline that we don’t want to face?
The exodus of working-class people from the Democratic Party over the last 50 years is due to party “elites’” increased devotion to their own power struggles, and to the monied interests of big corporations, banks and tech companies. Even in the current election campaign, Kamala Harris talks only about helping the middle class (a too-late attempt to return to the fold those millions of voters who already migrated away). She says little or nothing about the increasing number of tents dotting our forests and city streets. Neither she nor her opponent speak to, or for, the poor. Can’t get elected advocating for them!
Traditionally, many people joined the Republican Party, thinking less government spending, lowering and controlling the national debt, and pushing people to be more personally responsible for themselves and their communities are good medicine for what ails us. They made a good case back then.
Certainly, our continual overspending and the promise of new tax cuts assure that catastrophic consequences await us next month, or in a decade or two. However, the governing “elites” (whether Democrat or Republican at any given time) long ago learned to make promises to voters that allow themselves to attain or retain power, regardless of how tragic those promises’ downstream consequences are.
As always in times of popular dissatisfaction, another charismatic demagogue has appeared on the scene and glibly captured many folks’ devotion: Donald Trump, whose only interest is acquiring and wielding power. He plays on the anger of those who understandably feel abandoned by the “elites.” He senses our anger at those in charge of the current American oligarchy, and says, “I am your retribution.”
He styles himself as a downtrodden underdog, and millions believe him, seeing their own story in his story. His party, relying on the influx of disaffected Democrat working folks for victory, will never support their unions or their right to organize. Republican leaders have always opposed unions. It is a confused time for many folks: what to do to counter both major parties last few decades of indifference toward working people? Trump certainly is not the answer, but his disciples do not know that yet.
He purposely brings out people’s worst qualities, stokes our ancient human fears of those who look different, those strangers who come from afar. What are they thinking? What do they want? True enough, for decades millions have taken up residence here illegally, but most now fill important working roles, and many have become our neighbors and friends. Astonishingly, we want to send those millions away. They are energetic and have started new lives and families here, and new businesses, or they work in thousands of other businesses and service organizations at a time when there are too few of us to fill available jobs. If mass deportations are initiated, who will fill those several million sudden job openings? Business’ incomes will shrink, and many will close their doors. The US economy will fall into recession.
Amazing that we are so vulnerable to the rants of Donald Trump, most of whose previous White House staff have abandoned him, saying he is dangerous and unqualified to be President. In the past, other “great leader” demagogues have also played to people’s fears in identical ways: Putin, Hitler, Mao Zedong, Idi Amin, Mussolini, Franco, Xi Jinping, and many other dictators throughout human history. Each in his own way has trampled his own people and spread calamity among them.
Trump’s party is no longer “Republican,” no longer the party of conservative values. It has become the party of fear, anger, and bigotry, and it gives undeserved loyalty to a damaged, dangerous individual. “Republican” Senators and other Congressional representatives, Governors and state legislators and local officials are terrified of opposing him. They kneel before him, beseech him to support their reelection campaigns. Spineless at the prospect of facing Trump’s anger, they run scared of their own constituents who have fallen for the false idea that Trump as President will actually do something useful for us. Do we like his plan to slap tariffs on all China’s imported goods so we can pay the increased costs of those products? Do we want a nationwide abortion ban? Do we no longer want the benefits of the Affordable Care Act (Obama Care)?
In truth, both of the current, major party presidential candidates are of the “elite” class, and neither offers solutions for the great unbalanced load of our huge annual budget deficits and our growing national debt. Arguably, these are the most serious problems faced by our current American oligarchic system. But they are solvable only by causing considerable public pain through: (1) benefit program cuts and (2) tax increases. Politicians continue to ignore these two giants lurking in front of us all, for they fear losing their next election.
Although neither presidential candidate seriously addresses this issue, one of them displays strong elements of good character. She provides a positive, hopeful view of the country’s future. If she wins, she will work hard to do some good.
The other candidate cries about being a victim, seeks power again so he can force courts to set aside his felony convictions and other criminal indictments. Then he can seek vengeance for the justice that citizens’ juries brought upon him to punish his own actions.
Whoever wins this election, there will be violence in its aftermath. If Harris wins, Trump again will claim the election was rigged against him, and some of his disciples will create chaos and “act out” violently. If Trump does win, some of his disciples will puff out their chests and carry out acts of vengeance for what they see as his (and their) past mistreatment by “elites.”
The electoral college was created by our “elite” founding fathers, in part to protect their class interests from the erratic whims of “non-elite” often illiterate, voters. Through its tragically flawed processes, we are about to find out what kind of country roughly half of us want to live in.
