MANAGING SOCIAL CHANGE IN A DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM

Introduction

Not all parliamentary states are republic, nor all republican states are democratic, nor all democratic republics preserve democracy. Recently, a tendency towards populist preferences is being observed in many democratic countries. Rightist parties of different shades are gaining grounds in local or national elections in several European countries and in the U.S., although populist movements historically proved to erode democracy in the name of democracy. This essay is an attempt to study the causes of this erratic phenomenon and to explore how democracy may be defended against morphing into populism. Based on the assumption that this political change is due to social change, the on-going global social change is briefly considered and the ways such change is managed. Possible corrective actions are explored in the specific example of the U.S.

I.                Social change and some of its causes: Society is a natural phenomenon caused by human activity. It can either be rejected or conformed to, by the public or government.

II.              Evidence of current social change: Some indicators of the state of social life demonstrate sharp changes occurring in the last several decades.

III.            Managing social change: Orderly adaptation to change or unrest.

IV.            The case for the U.S.

While some recent scholarly articles are referred to, some research organizations and media surveys are also relied on. As for sampling for this essay, some global and U.S. data are taken as the sample of the contemporary social change, because the U.S. data is more readily available, dependable, up-to-date, and the size of the sample makes the data more meaningful than smaller samples. Another reason is that the U.S. is the accepted leader in the modern-day human activity. In all social communities roaming the earth since time immemorial, the need to organize for survival created the position of leadership. The international community’s natural leader became the U.S. since she entered the international scene in WWI. While sampling the U.S., we need to subject the data to a critical review. As R. Waldo Emmerson said, “good criticism is very rare and always precious”.

I.                Social change and some of its causes, indicators

Britannica on-line defines social change as “the alteration of mechanisms within the social structure, characterized by changes in cultural symbols, rules of behaviour, social organizations, or value systems. …. Social change can evolve from a number of different sources, including contact with other societies (diffusion), changes in the ecosystem (which can cause the loss of natural resources or widespread disease), technological change (epitomized by the Industrial Revolution, which created a new social group, the urban proletariat), and population growth and other demographic variables. Social change is also spurred by ideological, economic, and political movements. … Several ideas of social change have been developed in various cultures and historical periods. Three may be distinguished as the most basic: (1) the idea of decline or degeneration, or, in religious terms, the fall from an original state of grace, (2) the idea of cyclic change, a pattern of subsequent and recurring phases of growth and decline, and (3) the idea of continuous progress.” 

Sociologists and philosophers debated social change and its nature for a long time. Some theorized that changes are cyclical, therefore did not adduce due importance to causes of changes. Furthermore, changes occurred in earlier periods at a slower pace because of limitations in knowledge and in communication between people and communities, which made the change unnoticeable for centuries. Eventually, changes started developing faster, with the advance in human activity, within the lifetime of several generations concomitantly; they became an important area of study. Social changes do not occur at certain intervals and are not cyclical, as older determinist thinkers suggested. Social changes are in fact parts of a continuum, where each change contributes to the formation of the next change. What some social scientists call “One-directional change”. If it is a one-directional change, then it may be called natural evolution. Humans, having the cognitive ability, research their environment, amass knowledge, discover, invent and reinvent. One discovery leads to another. Hence is created an unending cycle of development, progress, change, which may be called more appropriately evolution, with its obvious and unintended consequences as well. Inventions affect society’s environment, the way of living and sometimes the way of thinking. The affected environment affects the intellect in return. As the eminent sociologist E. Durkheim suggested, individuals do not only constitute society they are also shaped by it. This explains the natural and unending cycles of societal development.

Additionally, the complexity of social structure with multiplicity of activities makes social evolution a dynamic environment of interactions. It is beyond the capability and intent of this essay to take into account also the effects of interactions between social indicators selected for this review. A thorough study of “relational sociology” is M. Emirbayer’s Manifesto for a Relational Sociology (American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 103 No.2, September 1997). 

Historically, wars and their economic consequences were important in bringing about social change. Since the first half of the 20^th century’s economic and political upheavals, wars were followed by peaceful development periods (generation 1946-65) until the next economic and political upheavals (cold war generation 1966-89), which was followed by technological revolution concomitant with international terrorism (generation 1990-2010). Currently, we seem to be in a period of another economic and political upheaval (generation 2011-2030), which may suggest that it will be followed by a period of peaceful development, hopefully starting around 2030.

Presently, the beginning of the current change may be safely placed in mid 1960s as the result of post-WWII euphoria started to wane with the Viet-Nam episode, followed by the Cold War, then the start of the technological breakthroughs, then international terrorism, and now global migrations spurred by political (economy, safety) or natural catastrophes. The recent acceleration of social change is mostly attributed to the quantum leap in communication technology. Technology that is found to not only accelerate change but also to corrupt society.

Adaptation to change requires a complete understanding of the nature of change. Social change is causative, it depends on developments in different parts of the organic constitution of society. Therefore, social change may have a multitude of reasons, like environmental, demographic, economic, scientific discovery, ideological/political force, etc. Scholars mostly study social change in relation to economic and/or technical developments. Explanation of social change solely or mostly on economic grounds is reducing the complex social phenomenon of change to a conflict between haves and have-nots. Such limited approach to the study of social change engenders limited thus unsatisfactory management of change. Hence, the selected indicators of change herebelow.

To note, although social change may be localized at first, it is communicable and is bound to become regional, even global. Therefore, national societies and their governments must be attentive also to social change occurring anywhere in the world.

II.             Evidence of current social change

Scholars of social change chose different indicators for studying different aspects of change. In this study, ideological differences or cultural diversity, level of education of general public, gender inequality, inequality in prosperity of people or economics, decline in societal harmony or safety, decline in communal and civic trust or solidarity are taken as indicators. Society is stable so long as all these factors are in balance; when one or more of them cannot be ensured, society becomes insecure (consequence of relational interaction) and seeks change. The response of people to social change may be instinctive thus leading to unrest or rational thus ending with orderly adaptation. The key to successful adaptation to change therefore lies in whether society would respond to change emotionally or rationally.

The Social Progress Index developed by the Social Progress Imperative collects data from 170 countries on the non-economic aspects of global social performance. Namely, regarding Basic Needs (like nutrition, medical care, water and sanitation), Foundation of Wellbeing (like basic education, health, information and communication, environmental quality), and Opportunity (like individual rights, freedoms, inclusivity in society, advanced education). The global index for 2024 averaged at 63.44/100, the average GDP per capita at $17.175,35. Denmark topped the list with an index of 90.38/00 and GDP/capita $59.704.23. Top twenty countries were from Europe, and New Zealand, Canada, Japan, S. Korea. “The US was ranked 29th with a score of 81.7/00 and GDP/capita of $64.702.98. In Basic Needs it ranked 103, in Foundations of Wellbeing 98, in Opportunity 88^th.” “Overall, Personal Rights have deteriorated for 112 countries (66%) since 2011, including four G7 countries … The Personal Rights component scores are estimated based on six key indicators: freedom of religion, property rights for women, freedom of peaceful assembly, access to justice, freedom of discussion and political rights.” 

Another global measure, the Youth Progress Index, found worldwide progress regressed to 63.44 in 2023 from 63.75 in 2022. … “The United States and Canada have declined in youth progress from 2011 to 2022. They joined Venezuela, Syria, Libya, Central African Republic and Lebanon, to be the only countries to have gone backwards over the past decade.”

The Economist regularly carries out a survey where “It combines information on the extent to which citizens can choose their political leaders in free and fair elections, enjoy civil liberties, prefer democracy over other political systems, can and do participate in politics, and have a functioning government that acts on their behalf. The rating ranges from 0 to 10 (least to most democratic), date range is 2006–2023. The Worldwide index was up by 3% from 5.5 to 5.7. Europe’s index declined 3%, from 7.7 to 7.5. The US’ index point was 8.2 in 2006 and 7.8 in 2023. A 5% decline. (Economist Intelligence Unit (2006-2023), Last updated May 22, 2024)

“Each year EIU grades 167 countries and territories on a scale of ten according to the strength of their democratic practices, including how fairly they run elections and how well they protect civil liberties. It then groups them into four categories: full democracies, flawed democracies, hybrid regimes and authoritarian regimes. The latest report, published on February 15th, shows that less than 8% of the world’s population live in full democracies, and that 39.4% are under authoritarian rule—up from 36.9% in 2022.” (The Economist, Where democracy is most at risk, Four lessons from EIU’s new ranking of democracies, Feb 14^th, 2024). The US is placed 29^th in the index in the category of “flowed democracy” along with Chile, Czech rep., Israel, India, Poland, Jamaica and others, below the Western European countries, Canada and Australia, who are in the “full democracy” category.

The Legatum Prosperity Index™ 2023 listed the US 19^th. It measures, in 167 countries, Safety & security, Personal Freedom, Governance, Social Capital, Investment Environment, Enterprise Conditions, Infrastructure & Market Access, Economic Quality, Living Conditions, Health, Education, Natural Environment.

A September 2019 survey by Pew Research found that the party divide in the US is larger than any of the social divides. Political divide within the American public is mostly in gun ownership (a safety and quasi constitutional issue), abortion (a crypto religious issue), race, immigration policy (a nationalist issue), and role of government (constitutional issue). Foreign affairs sems to be of the least concern, presumably either over-confidence in self-security or disinterest or lack of knowledge on anything foreign. Pew Research Report published in May 2022 on What Americans Know About International Affairs, found that overall respondents answered correctly to 6.8 questions out of 12 (52.5%). Those with tertiary education answered correctly 60.8%, high school grads answered correctly 41.6%. Ages 18 to 49 were less knowledgeable than ages 50-65 with thirty points difference). The Pew survey carried out globally in 2022-23 and published in April 2023 shows that only 10% surveyed in advanced countries expressed that citizens were to be more informed and involved, the US with 5% was at the bottom of the list. While “concern about overall ‘citizen quality’ run the gamut”, and unity was called for, other concerns were the electoral systems with about 10%, rule of law with about 5%, safety (law enforcement) and judicial system with 1-3%. The main concern about the judicial system was its politicization.

Globally, it seems that people in general have a positive view of democracy, but they do not seem to take active part in the democratic process and take advantage of the power democracy offers them. It remains to be determined how authorities must address the improvement or correction of areas in which the public expressed dissatisfaction.

Cultural factor in diversity

Is homogeneity possible in increasingly diverse societies, or is diversity necessary?

When social matters are assessed from the axiological point of view (intuitive, emotional as opposed to logical, rational), culture appears to be the most important measure of assessment. Social relations create culture, culture shapes society. Culture has long historical roots and is the most pervasive and powerful element of society, like religion. Accordingly, culture may be either a drag or a facilitator for adaptation to social change. Some scholars attributed this distinction to two types of culture, “mass culture” and “high culture”. There are of course different elements working in culture, including good and bad elements. Some philosophers (Freud, Nietzsche, Spengler, et al.) thought there was no way of avoiding the bad actors in culture like religion, which they called “mass delusion”, to save society from its destiny of degradation. Some other scholars (Marcuse), seeking solution in culture itself, suggested that if in this competition the “high culture” overtakes the “mass culture” society survives. Some others sought solutions outside of culture like revolution, or intervention by ruling authority. This essay focuses on the possibility of avoiding the negative effects of culture like on social equality and harmony or stability.  

Pew Research reported in 2022, 121 countries provided financial assistance to their religious schools, 106 to religious properties, and 67 gave a variety of benefits directly to the clergy. We may say then in general terms, about half of countries in the world channel public funds to religious establishments, presumably to dispense them as agents of the executive authority for the “common good”. This practice may be under the Concordats concluded with Vatican by countries involved. The reality is that the agency of religious institutions transforms the executive’s public duty of serving “common good” into religious charity, a.k.a. misuse of public funds.

For example, in the U.S., despite the fact that Thomas Jefferson rightly reminded us, “In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own” (William Ebenstein, Introduction to Political Philosophy, Rinehart 1952), De Tocqueville noted, there is no country in the whole world in which the Christian religion retains a greater influence over the souls of men than in America. Pew Research in 2009 Religion and Public Life Project reported that one third of Americans still do not believe in evolution. “Some Republican operatives….  have openly stated that they believe government policies should be shaped in accordance with Christianity” (Why religion is becoming an even stronger force within the Republican Party, Perry Bacon Jr., WPost, April 16, 2024). A May 2023 Pew Research survey reported that a substantial portion of protestants are very active in propagating their faith and involved in politics. The Economist carried an article titled Many Trump Supporters Believe God Has Chosen him to Rule, F. Tennessee, The Economist, Dec. 20, 2023. Historian Frank Lambert wrote in Religion in American Politics (Princeton University Press, 2010), “Many Americans believed that their country was God’s chosen land and that the government should protect Christianity’s role in it. Their heirs are the Christian nationalists of today.”. Tim Alberta wrote in The Kingdom, the Power and the Glory (Harper Collins, 2023), how evangelical leaders “are perverting the gospels and preying on the anxieties of their flock, with worrying consequences for American politics and the church.” Reverend F. Ritsch wrote in Washington Post 2003, “Despite our secularism, the US has rarely been so publicly and politically ‘Christian’ as it is today. Or perhaps it is because of our secularism”. He was rightly implying that secularism is misinterpreted to mean real separation of church and state (see Secularism and the Separation of Church and State, sociopoliticalviews.blogspot.com).

An in-depth investigation by Washington Post in the course of 2024 found out that billions in taxpayer money goes to religious schools via vouchers, and to home schooling. “Lawmakers in mostly conservative states are pushing a coordinated effort to bring chaplains into public schools, aided by a new, legislation-crafting network that aims to address policy issues ‘from a biblical world view’ and by a consortium whose promotional materials say chaplains are a way to convert millions to Christianity. ...

Lawmakers in Texas and in other states advocating for chaplains said they have worked with the Oklahoma-based National School Chaplain Association, whose annual report says it has served 27 million students in two dozen countries. ….

Recent Supreme Court rulings have strengthened the role of publicly funded schools as the vanguard for breaching the traditional divide between church and state. The court has ruled that state-run voucher programs must fund religious schools and that public grant programs can’t exclude religious institutions. …. Advocates for church-state separation say the number of bills seeking to fund and empower conservative religious beliefs has increased, to 1,200 filed this year.” (Putting chaplains in public school is the latest battle in culture wars Washington Post By Michelle Boorstein March 22, 2024).

Quality Education factor in representative system

Is knowledge a luxury (elitism) or is it a human right necessary for self-development within society?

In any country there is always a portion of society ill-informed (therefore has different views) about the concept of the common good, therefore their participation in civic life is erratic. Some people take civic participation lightly, like viewing politics and politicians as a spectacle, excitement or humor/joke.

Humans, having the cognitive and reasoning ability, have foresight, progress and creativity. However, this advantage comes with a problem laden baggage: the plurality of perception, thus interpretation, of the same fact. Perceptions are not simply physical phenomena like vision, they are rather cognitive. The brain processes perceptions with the help of the individual’s experiences and knowledge previously recorded. Consequently, different perceptions produce differing opinions, even conflicts between people, especially if perceptions become deterministic, immutable beliefs (this may be what is called cognitive bias or preconceived disposition, prejudice or fanaticism). In an effort to reduce conflict, we induce the conciliation ability of the mind with objective analytical and rational methods. This suggests heeding to the importance of good education policy, including developing cognitive and behavioral mastery in young minds.

Anthony Giddens remarked, “Government exists to: … promote the active development of human capital through its core role in the education system” (Third Way, Polity 2001).

As P. Brantlinger says, “Insofar as technological ‘progress’ has failed to transform alienated masses into enlightened publics, it has failed to be progress …….  humanity must educate itself quickly, or perish.” (Bread and Circuses, Cornell Uni. Press 1983)

V. Kantzara noted “Education is considered an institution of paramount importance in sustaining and securing the historical continuity of current social organization…. In this function, schooling operates as a ‘melting pot’, while it cultivates tolerance and understanding among segments of the population; at the same time it provides a valuable recourse to new members accentuating and promoting citizenship and the sense of belonging. In doing this, education is accentuating valuable ideals, some of them contradictory, such as the value of competition and the value of solidarity. It is an

institution with powerful cultural, social, economic and political dimensions, all in one. (The Relation of Education to Social Cohesion, Social Cohesion and Development, 6(1), 37-50, 2011)

H. Bartoli wrote in World Social Science Report 1999 (UNESCO), “(Education) must be the catalyser for the desire to live together.”

Renown philosopher A. Whitehead wrote in Science and the Modern World (Reinhart 1948), “The problem is not how to produce great men, but how to produce great societies. The great society will put up the men for the occasion.”

Yet, K. Hayward, a criminologist at the University of Copenhagen, “contends that young people today are less mature than previous generations” that “Pop culture is infantilising people.” (The Economist, Is Western culture stopping people from growing up? Kidults are all around you, Aug 16^th, 2024)

A Pew survey of the US public schools posted on April 4, 2024, reports that 48% of K-12 schoolteachers say that academic performance of students is poor, 1/3 say it  is good, 17% very good, student behavior (for disinterest in learning, cellphone distraction, disrespect) is poor in 49%, good in 35%, very good in 13%, while they say parent involvement, especially with high school students, is better (79% of teachers say parents hold students accountable for misbehavior, 68% help students with their schoolwork, 63% ensure student attendance). Teachers express a need for better quality teachers and better curriculum.

On curriculum, The Hill reported on Feb. 22, 2024, 71% of teachers say they have enough say over the curriculum, 58% say government has influence, 32% say parents influence it, while 19% think parents do not have enough influence. A Pew Survey in February 2024 found 26% of teachers believe parents have too much say on curriculum.

As to parental guidance, a Pew Research survey carried out in the fall of 2022 showed that mothers more than fathers attach more importance to their children having moral values, like honesty, compassion, acceptance of others. A January 2024 report found a large majority of people between 18 and 34 thought their parents well-prepared them, 76% said their relations with their father is good, 84% said it is good with their mother, and 24% and 14% respectively said it is bad.

Findings in student performance, teacher assessment, and parental oversight regarding the state of education can be verified by information regarding the employment status of fresh graduates. “After experiencing a raft of problems with young new hires, one in six bosses say they’re hesitant to hire college grads again.

Meanwhile, one in seven bosses have admitted that they may avoid hiring them altogether next year.

Three-quarters of the companies surveyed said some or all of their recent graduate hires were unsatisfactory in some way. … Bosses also pointed to Gen Z being unprofessional, unorganized and having poor communication skills as their top reasons for having to sack grads.

Leaders say they have struggled with the latest generation's tangible challenges, including being late to work and meetings often, not wearing office-appropriate clothing, and using language appropriate for the workspace.

Now, more than half of hiring managers have come to the conclusion that college grads are unprepared for the world of work.” (Orianna Rosa Royle, Bosses are firing Gen Z grads just months after hiring them—here’s what they say needs to change, Fortune, September 26, 2024)

When such failure of the youth is compared with the high graduation rate we cannot help but be concerned about the quality of education they receive. 2022 survey by Gallup reports that the share of high school and college graduates in the working age population (54.3% of the general population) is as high as 91.2% and 37.7% respectively. In fact, a 2024 survey by Gallup shows 55% of people were dissatisfied with the quality of education. Poor curriculum was the top reason given for dissatisfaction (15%) from among 28 other reasons listed.

Poor quality of education has several negative social, economic and political consequences, “The class divide in American social capital has grown over the past few decades. Americans with fewer years of formal education participate less often in community life.” (Daniel A. Cox, Sam Pressler, Disconnected: The Growing Class Divide in American Civic Life, Findings from 2024 American Social Capital Survey, Survey Center on American Life, August 22, 2024)

From all this information the conclusion that could be reached is that there must be something amiss in our education system, which severely affects our social character. These observations and findings become more obvious in the absence or less presence of the same educational dilemma in advanced European countries. Therefore, instead of exploiting this failure in society for political gains by an attempt to demean the educated class with the epithet “woke”, politicians must assign urgency and importance to the improvement of education in the country for avoiding further class division. Education is not only for economic survival of the individual, it is more importantly for preparing him to be a productive member of society, preparing him to fit in society and life, which in turn promotes social equality, civic rights and responsibilities, solidarity.

Gender gap factor and the principle of equality

Is equality for the sake of equality or is it for social justice in human dignity?

As to the definition of “women’s rights”, it clearly does not mean different rights for women. Considering it as different rights is discrimination in and of itself. The definition of “women’s rights” is and must be, the same rights as men’s; in other words equality. The best definition yet should be “women’s rights are human rights”, to accurately reflect the objective of eliminating inequality of rights between genders. If the term “women’s rights” is used to indicate their human rights not respected, an appropriate definition would be “women’s missing human rights”.

Since the Greek and Roman antiquities women’s status was kept inferior to men’s and worsened after the introduction of religions. Only in the 18^th century, along with the industrial revolution, did some European women started to come out by publishing their work in astronomy, botany, or entomology and women’s rights became a matter of sociologist’s discourse (John Locke). But not until the 20th century that women’s rights to employment, to property, to vote (in other words in law) became a legislated reality first, reportedly, in Finland in 1905 (in 1920 in the U.S.). 21st century revolution in technology having rendered labor less dependent on corporal ability and more on intellectual prowess, more women could enter the labor force than did with the preceding industrial revolution. This slow development in women’s social status had an indelible effect not only on the economy but more importantly on society in general.

An important factor in the change of women’s social status is the dramatic rise in their success in education. They not only entered the labor force, but also at higher levels. Therefore, they were more readily employable and less interested in marriage. Paternal cultural traditions have become outmoded, changing family life and concept. This also explains the findings in surveys that younger men are more likely to be anti-feminist than the older men.

“Teenage boys in rich countries are 50% more likely than girls to flunk all three basic subjects in school: maths, reading and science.” (The Economist, Men adrift, Badly educated men in rich countries have not adapted well to trade, technology or feminism, May 28, 2015). “In EU 28% of boys and 18% of girls in high-school fail. … The share of men aged 25 to 34 with tertiary degrees rose from 21% to 35% between 2002 and 2020. For women it rose faster, from 25% to 46%. In America, the gap is about the same: ten percentage points more young women than men earn a bachelor’s degree.” (The Economist, Why young men and women are drifting apart, Diverging worldviews could affect politics, families and more, March 13, 2024). “In the European Union fully 46% of them earn degrees, versus 35% of young men, a gap that has doubled since 2002 … Similar results can be found in Britain, South Korea and China.” (The Economist, Making sense of the gulf between young men and women, Mar 14^th, 2024)

A Pew survey published on December 18, 2023, notes that U.S. college enrolment of men ages 18-24 has been declining since 2011 from 47% to 39% in 2022, in comparison to the decline in enrolment of women from 52% to 48%. College Graduation Statistics records, “Among bachelor’s degree holders, female graduates have outnumbered male graduates since 2015.” (EducationData.org March 15, 2024). In 2022, this difference expanded to all degree levels.

In the US, the share of men of prime working age who have a job has fallen from a peak of nearly 95% in the mid-1960s to only 84% in 2010. In Britain the share of men aged 16-64 who work has fallen from 92% in 1971 to 76% in 2013; for women it has risen from 53% to 67%. In America in 2010 25% of 25- to 54-year-old men with only a high-school education were not in work; for those who did not graduate high school the rate was 35%.” (The Economist, March 13, 2024). “In 1900, only 6% of married women worked, but by 1998 it had increased to 61%. …. In 1950, 30% of the labor force were women; by 1990 this had increased to 45%. (Donncha Kavanagh, et al., Are we living in a time of particularly rapid social change? And how might we know?, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Volume 169, August 2021). Employment rate of genders in August 2024, in work force of age 25-54, was 64.9% for men and 55.4 for women, according to US Department of Labor website.

Single parent household numbers increased from 4% in 1970 to 6% in 2021 according to a Pew Research survey reported in September 2023, and 78% of people found single parenting acceptable. The share of married people in the adult population decreased from 69% in 1970 to 50% in 2021. 1/3 of people find open marriage acceptable. Among the people of ages between 25 and 54, 29% were singles in 1990, and 53% in 2019.

All these fundamental changes from the traditional family structure must have certainly caused a change also in the upbringing of children, consequently also in the character of society. Fast forward to 21^st century, sexual violence against women, inequality at work and in wages relative to men’s, intervention in their reproductive rights, and discrimination in access to education continue in most parts of the world, including in the U.S. Men became dejected, angry, violent towards women and against the establishment in general.[i]

Economic gap factor and the principle of social justice

Is economic equality only for the sake of equality or primarily for achieving justice and social cohesion?

The industrial and service sectors’ work conditions remained somewhat the same until after WWII, pointedly until the fast advance in information technology, so-called “technological revolution”. Economic inequality has increased in all major countries. In the U.S.  “(T)here has been a clear trend since 1980, with the top 1% consistently and inexorably increasing their share, which is almost certainly due to the liberalization of the economy initiated during the Reagan years.” (Kavanagh et al. 2021). The Pew survey in September 2019 found “Nearly three-quarters of Americans (73%) say major corporations in the U.S. have too much power. A majority of the public (58%) says tax rates on household income over $250,000 should be raised a little or a lot.”

The cause for inequality must be unfair business practices where a government of liberal economy policy defers to the business sector, and where business lobbying of politicians is practiced and is not offset by lobbying efforts of people.  

Work satisfaction

Work time: While in the EU work time may not exceed 6 days a week, 48 hours a week, , and 13 hours a day, and 8 hours a day for those who work at night, hazardous or strenuous job, in the US, it is 35-59 hours/wk for 70% of working people, 60+hrs/wk for 15%, and 34 hrs/wk or less for 14%. (Gallup web site survey 2023).

Annual leave: While EU employees are entitled to at least 4 weeks paid holiday per year, in the US there is no national mandate for annual leave, employers decide that. The average is estimated to be ten working days (two weeks). On the other hand, Pew Research of February 2023 finds that 46% of workers do not use their time-off for fear of possible negative effects on their job. Yet a Gallup survey in 2023 found that 75% of the workforce considers the amount of leave satisfactory. (Gallup web site)

Parental leave: In EU countries, employees (regardless of gender) are entitled to at least 4 months of parental leave (2 months of it may be paid leave) from the birth or adoption of a child, until the child is 8 years old. In the US, only 11 states offer paid or partially paid parental leave for varying durations of up to 12 weeks.

Carers' leave: In the EU countries employees are entitled to carers' leave of at least 5 working days per year for a person living in the same household who needs significant care. In the US, there is no such paid leave, workers may take leave with or without pay for this purpose.

Wages: Average hourly labor pay for 2023 was estimated at €31.8 per hour in the EU and at €35.6 in the euro zone. In the US, the Bureau of Labor Statistics Website report for May 2023 indicates that the mean pay for 151.8 million people in all occupations was $65.5 thousand a year, $31.5/h. This figure is in fact much lower considering that the US average includes higher paid professional occupations beyond the labor wage. Yet, 72% of those surveyed by Gallup in 2023 expressed satisfaction with their wage.[ii]

A better understanding of the value of wages would require also their comparison to the cost of living. The median cost of living in Europe in 2023 was $1,746, it was $2,508 in the U.S. (The Economist, Dec 10, 2023, and Apr 29, 2024). Therefore, not only the wages and other employment benefits in the US are lower than in many EU countries, but they are also less to meet the cost of living (although prices in general are lower in the US, like energy and groceries, others like medications, health services, all kinds of insurances’ high costs tilt the scale).

This economic set-up in favor of big corporations does not only explain why there is such a large loan sector operating in the U.S. economy, but also explains why the general public’s savings are lower in the U.S. and the accumulation of wealth is higher in the top 1%, which also skews the higher GDP in favor of the U.S. “In the second quarter of 2024, the saving rate in Europe was 15.7% — an increase from the 15.2% rate seen in the quarter prior, according to Eurostat, the statistical office of the European Union. ” (The World Economic Forum website, Oct 10, 2024). US personal savings rate in September 2024 was 4.6% (Bureau of Economic Analysis website).  “… the share of labor income in GDP has declined by around 7 percentage points since the end of World War II. … with the overall stock market valuation rising from 55% of GDP in 1985 to 200% of GDP today.” (J. D. Sachs). This is a typical scenario for an oligarchic system, an immeasurable contribution to economic inequality and injustice.

There is also a grave legal injustice created by the Supreme Court decision. On January 21, 2010, the court took a 5–4 decision that struck down the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act restrictions on  financial contributions to election campaigns by corporations. Since then, in the last four elections, there has been an increasing influence of large businesses on politics, making any legislative corrective action impossible for the near future.

Retirement benefits: “The US earned just a C+ for its retirement system in the 16th annual Mercer CFA Institute Global Pension Index, coming in 29th out of 48 countries. The US retirement system has never surpassed a C+ since the index's inception in 2009. The big anchors on the American grade include concerns over pension funding and shortfalls in private retirement savings. ….. However, in the US, a third of private industry workers don't have access to an employer-sponsored retirement plan.” (Janna Herron, The US retirement system gets a C+ in global study, Yahoo Finance, October 14, 2024). Yet, Gallup poll of 2023 found 63% of work force were satisfied with their retirement plan. It remains to be seen whether “The Secure 2.0 Act, legislation President Joe Biden signed into law in 2023, aims to boost participation in the US by requiring employers with new 401(k) and 403(b) plans to automatically enroll their workers, starting in 2025. The legislation also includes auto-escalation of contributions.” (ibid) will help.

The major reason for the economic inequality in the US seems to be that corporations’ prosperity takes precedence over people’s prosperity, because workers do not get their due share from the America’s great economic success/prosperity.

Public Safety factor and the principle of freedoms

Is individual freedom limitless, to the extent of nullifying the principle of equality?

Racial and all other discriminations, crime, drug trafficking are threats to rights over life, property or dignity, which raises the question about reification of freedom of these rights.

Political scientist A. Giddens observes, “Equality and individual freedom may conflict …. Old-style social democracy, however, was inclined to treat rights as unconditional claims. With expending individualism should come an extension of individual obligations.” (A. Giddens, The Third Way, Polity, 1998-2001).

Racial discrimination: This is not an issue specific to the US but is topical because of its historical deep imprint on cultural, social and political life of the country. Despite several government interventions and measures since the Civil War, stealth discrimination persists as it manifests in various parts of the country and of activities. Since racism has been subjected to intensive discourse, it will not be discussed here. It will only be noted that “(in) November 2012 when, following Barack Obama's re-election as US President, a series of online petitions were launched seeking the secession of various states.” (Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Volume 169, August 2021). Presumably, this was because first time a black citizen was elected president of the overwhelmingly white population. In fact, populist nationalism with overtones of white supremacy overtook the political power at the end of his term. An emblematic example is that the health care reform introduced by the Obama administration with the Affordable Care Act is continuously attacked to date by the populists, despite its wide popularity, simply because it is commonly and approvingly called “Obamacare”.

Crime: The homicide rate rose rapidly worldwide from the mid-1960s but has dropped equally rapidly since 1990, though the US rate is still high compared to other advanced countries. Gun Violence Archive website records for 2023, 18.854 deaths, 36.338 injuries, 656 mass shootings, 40 mass murders with guns. We may note that mass murders happened also in some other countries during international terrorism since the last quarter of the last century. However, mass murder did not become a lasting frequent phenomenon in other countries to become a social problem. “The fact that the U.S. ranks among countries that are involved in some form of conflict (whether that be civil war, general unrest, drug/arms trafficking etc.) is really startling …… The report was based on data from the 2021 Global Burden of Disease study, which provides an in-depth look at mortality and disability across countries, and the latest 2022 mortality data from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.” (Gun death rates in some U.S. states comparable to conflict zones, study finds, Rachel Pannett, October 31, 2024 Washington Post)

The U.S. is named among the countries where personal gun ownership is high. The U.S. is in the company of only Yemen, Serbia and Montenegro, of which none is a democratic or high GDP country. 32% of adult Americans own guns, according to a Pew Research survey in June 2023. “Based on NICS background data and manufacturing records, it is estimated that there are 500 million civilian-owned firearms in the U.S. Only 6.06 million firearms are registered in America (the U.S. does not require registration for all firearms). Estimates show that 82,880,000 people own at least one firearm in 2023.” (How Many Gun Owners are in America, 2024 Statistics) “Vending machines selling ammunition will now be in grocery stores in Alabama, Texas and Oklahoma. … The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has allowed the machines, telling CNN in a statement: ‘A federal license is not required to sell ammunition. However, commercial sales of ammunition must comply with state laws as well as any applicable federal laws.” (Company debuts vending machines selling ammunition in 3 Southern states, Anissa Carby and Navya Shukla, CNN, July 13, 2024)

Yet, a Pew report of July 2023 notes that 60% of people view gun violence as a problem.

Drug addiction: Washington Post, with reference to the National Survey on Drug use and Health, reported that more than half (52.5%) of all Americans age 18 and older have tried an illicit drug, including marijuana, any hallucinogen, cocaine, LSD, inhalants, extasy, methamphetamine, crack, heroine, and PCP. In 2023, 6 million were addicted to opioids and 110.000 died of overdose. (Who’s most likely to smoke weed, Washington Post, January 14, 2023).  The Economist, June 10, 2024, reported approximately 11 million Americans are getting high on marijuana every day.

And yet, decriminalization of and commercial sale of marijuana is already in many states or on their ballot for the upcoming election.

 Solidarity and trust in individualistic society

Does individualism mean self-interest over or even at the expense of others’ interests?

“Definitions and associated conceptual frameworks usually summarise social cohesion as collective attributes and behaviours characterised by positive social relations, a sense of identification or belonging, and an orientation towards the common good. However, there are a large variety of definitions,” (Louis Moustakas, Social Cohesion: Definitions, Causes and Consequences, Encyclopedia of Social Sciences 2023, 3(3), 1028 1037; https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia3030075 )

Humans, as social creatures, may be more social than individualistic. They cannot escape from society, individualism is self-imposed. Their individuality must be relative to being a member of society because of their instinctive need for safety and desire for success. Therefore, while he is working for his own benefit (individualistic), he is benefiting society (communitarian), a mutuality, neither succeeding independently from the other. This may be what is called “civic individualism” and “civic humanism”. Liberalism, as defined by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, is an individual’s work through government in the republican system to promote individual good/interests.

Political scientist A. Giddens wrote in The Third Way, as criticism of selfish interpretation of individualism: “Individualism and choice are supposed to stop abruptly at the boundaries of the family and national identity, where tradition must stand intact.” If practiced in its absolute sense, individualism works against common interests.

Contemporary sociologist P. Bourdieu notes in Practical Reason (Stanford University Press 1998) that the state is charged with social unification, and state bureaucracy is designed for that purpose. “Culture is unifying”. Schools’ teaching is based on nationally dominant culture, which is also the foundation of the nation-state and national identity.

A great portion of people are averse to having any limitation on their freedoms. Although it is incomprehensible how one can have freedom at all if the freedom of Others’ were not limited. If individual freedom were at the expense of Others’ it would be stripped of any meaning and thus be nullified. Thus, one has to accept limitations on his/her freedom as he/she would expect limitations on the freedoms of Others. Everything in an individual’s social life is relative to the social space. That is what the social system dictates and what makes us social creatures.

Most media reports suggest that democracy’s current decline in the world started in 2016. While 45.3% of the world population lives in varying degrees of democracy, 39.9% live under autocratic regimes. “Africa is not the only part of the world where democratic disillusion is spreading. A whopping 62% of Americans and 56% of French told a Pew poll last year that they were not satisfied with democracy in their countries. Among young Americans, nearly a fifth think a dictatorship would be preferable.”  (Why Africans are Losing Faith in Democracy, The Economist, Oct.5, 2023)

J. Basevich, in The Limits of Power (Metropolitan Books 2008), accurately describes the current American psyche, “Good fortune and a position of apparent preeminence placed the United States under the most grievous temptation to self-adulation.” and “… heightened claims of individual autonomy have eviscerated the concept of citizenship. Yesterday’s civic obligations have become today’s civic options.”

“In 2006, when Gallup first started asking Americans about their trust in key institutions, the country ranked at the top of the G7 league table, tied with Britain. In 2023, for the first time, America came last. (America’s trust in its institutions has collapsed, The Economist, Apr 17th, 2024). A Pew Report in July 2023 notes that 79% of Americans have a negative view of US politics, calling it “divisive” or “polarized”. September 2023 Pew Research survey shows that 63% of adults do not trust the political system, only 4% do. Their view of the quality of political candidates is low (72%), their description of politics is “divisive”, and have no confidence in the system. Several Gallup surveys published in 2024 report that trust among Americans in their government is 43% with 57% in distrust (distrust in executive is 59%, in legislative branch 65%, in judiciary 51%, in media 69%).

Equally important is that trust in fellow countrymen’s judgement is 45%. A Pew Survey, titled Americans less likely to feel close to their community, carried out in 24 countries in 2023 and published in 2024, finds that while international median of people feeling close to their community is 83%, it is 66% in the US. This finding may be affected by the more populous and community oriented East Asian culture, and less populous individual oriented Western culture. Nevertheless, considering also other observations cited here, we can affirm that there is an ongoing phenomenon of people withdrawing from communal ties in the democratic West.

The withdrawal and division manifest itself in the increase in acrimoniousness in public and political dialogue since the 1990s. Such an atmosphere created by exploiting social divides for political gains causes further hardening of opinions, fanaticism. The main means of exploitation is of course religious differences. Mass migrations have recently become also a subject of political divide in many countries, but while there is a general agreement among the public that immigration is a multi-thronged international problem that should and could be addressed, some political parties in immigrant receiving countries prefer to exploit it by arousing nationalistic feelings.

Absolute individualism feeds selfishness, egotism, hedonism, greed, anti-social attitude, megalomania, exceptionalism, nationalism, insolence, disdain/indifference, formation of social classes, divisions; all of which are detrimental to social cohesion, harmony and trust.

The concepts of national identity, social solidarity, mutual trust, harmony or homogeneity used here for a diverse and pluralist society do not mean and should not be interpreted to mean similarly nationalism, exceptionalism, xenophobia, supremacy.

Demographic factor (Population increase)

Population increase necessarily increases demand in public services, including infra-structure, health, transportation, communication, as well as in availability of work and housing, inter alia. While these demands may be welcome by economy and businesses, population increase causes “crowding” in workplaces, residential areas, public service places, on the roads, etc., all of which have oft ignored psychological effects on people, especially in areas of concentration of diverse cultures. Some psychological effects of “crowding” may be discomfort in privacy and lifestyle, fear of estrangement or of safety.

From 1900 to the present, life expectancy increased from 50 years of age to 80 years, death rate decreased from 80 per 100.000 to 25. World population, in particular in low income and low education countries, is on the rise; the world population of about 1.6 billion in 1900 ballooned to about 8.0 billion in 2023. In the U.S. this increase is historically and partly due to immigration. It is U.S.’ conscientious political choice to be open to immigration basically for economic reasons. Census Bureau’s most recent records show there are 287.083 million U.S. born, 24.970 million naturalized citizens, and 22.861 million aliens. That is 85.67%, 7.46%, 6.87% respectively. (After excluding aliens these figures translate into about 92% US born and 8% naturalized). Even considering that some U.S. borns are certainly from naturalized citizens, any increase in 8 percentage points would not have a substantial effect on the large margin of the U.S. born citizens. We may take note also of the Census Bureau reports that in recent years there was an increasing emigration particularly to Europe; in 2019 alone emigration was about 40 million people (almost 9% of population) seeking a “better quality of life”. There does not seem to be any study whether such emigration is due to the cultural effect of “crowding”, although it is also in Europe, or due to other social changes like in their economic conditions or safety considerations. Nevertheless, such moves at almost a 9% rate may be a sign of dissatisfaction or disappointment with social conditions.

III.     Managing social change

Government dereliction in delivering social services, like equality, justice, safety, invites distrust in institutions, policies, politicians, establishment, rule of law, and authority, disrupting social cohesion. Therefore, response to social change requires the involvement of both the public and the ruling authority.

If in a society faced with social change, there is sufficient commonality of interest and purpose despite differences in individual-specific perceptions, the political establishment may be able to adopt standards and legislation to adapt the system to the changes. If there is no commonality of interest and purpose, whether the democratic executive authority does or does not act for transition to new social norms, one part of society will remain dissatisfied. The question is, therefore, how to overcome that opposition.

Instinctive response – Detriment to democracy

In any society there are people who do not want their environment to change for fear of losing their culture, their habitual status, and for being “othered”. They are not capable of understanding and accepting change, because they think they are the mainstay of society yet trapped in a changing society; it is society’s fault, not theirs. They become anti-social and anti-establishment. If their number is more than marginal and if they are organized by someone or some organization, they will be an obstacle to or a drag on an unavoidable transition of society to change. K. Cerulo and colleagues identified the problem as “Individuals with cognition different than the ones that form the common culture create difficulty, incongruity for themselves and for the society, like forming anti-social beliefs, distrust in society, in solidarity, in rule of law, all of which could lead to unrest when exploited by other people or worse by politicians.” (Karen Cerulo et al., Annual Review of Sociology, Vol. 47, 2021).

A democratic government avoids imposing adaptation to social change on resistant groups. Thus, democracy becomes democracy’s innate self-destructive mechanism. The portion of society resistant to change gains voice at the political platform through democratic means and sets out to chisel away the establishment. Populism, which may morph into ochlocracy, then dictatorship overtakes by democratic means, not necessarily by forceful revolution.

“Effective and visionary leaders …. seem to avoid revolutions by making necessary reforms. Revolution seems to occur only in the states that are ineffective, undemocratic, repressive, and lose their legitimacy.” (Gizachew Tiruneh, Social Revolutions: Their Causes, Patterns, and Phases, https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244014548845) 

If resistance to change develops slowly, it has time to get organized and can form a counter-power against the ruling political power and it may lead to armed conflict between the power centers, like in the case of spontaneous revolution (change by use of force). However, a violent revolution cannot succeed unless peoplepower includes all or at least a section of the military. But there are also non-violent ways of going against the establishment, like local administrations adopting laws or regulations contrary to federal policies. An example is the Jim Crow law adopted by the US Southern States after they lost the Civil War; in fact, this method is still applied quietly by some states in the federation.

As to the current social change, resistance was spontaneous in dictatorial regimes, like in Middle Eastern Arab countries. In many traditionally liberal countries, resistance to adapt has been conspicuous, like in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, UK, Germany, Austria and others’ response to change is orderly but too slow. Time allowed the fanatic forces to launch international terrorism (President Bush’s religious rhetoric in otherwise justified fight against fanatic terrorism made the fight more difficult and last longer) and the following mass migrations.

As for the U.S., F. Zekeria in his book Age of Revolutions (Norton 2024) suggested that the introduction of internet mass media in 1991 spread globalization to the realm of culture, decimating society’s communal character and bringing out humans’ dark side. Negativity, challenge to order, identity and culture wars ensued. He also accurately observed in his article in Washington Post on April 5, 2024, that some devout people moved to secularism under the influence of advances in science and reason, others, afraid of losing their faith, embraced “populism and authoritarianism”. We may add to the list of reasons for populism, the absurd immigration laws and that the coming of a populist government to power in 2016 was in fact a retort to the two-term presidency of a black American.

Rational response - Case for education

Orderly management of social change necessarily requires congruity between the public and the ruling authority. First let us consider the responsibility of people.

"Whenever the people are well informed, they can be trusted with their own government; that whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights." (Thomas Jefferson to Richard Price, January 8, 1789, https://www.loc.gov/collections/thomas-jefferson-papers/articles-and-essays/selected-quotations-from-the-thomas-jefferson-papers/)

As coined by renown sociologist P. Bourdieu, education is the “cultural capital”, (Practical Reason, Polity Press 1998).

Also, Plato’s wisdom may be recalled here, no social or political organization can be better than the quality of the men and women who compose it.

“We shall one day learn to supersede politics by education. … What we call our root-and-branch reforms … is only medicating the symptoms. We must begin higher-up, namely in Education.” “Society cannot do without cultivated men.” (The Essays of Ralph Waldo Emmerson, Parkway Printing, 1944)

The great thinker of the last century Alfred N. Whitehead wrote in The Aims of Education and Other Essays (The Free Press 1967), “Education is the acquisition of the art of the utilization of knowledge”, education for “mental aptitude” and “useful truths” cannot provide progress. You need wisdom, which is how to use knowledge.

Philosopher and educator R. Rorty noted, rather than trying to find what is frozen in the past, the search for a better future is more useful for common good; nature does not have a mind thus purpose, it adapts to the environment, so should men “by dynamic cultural innovation and humanistic pluralism”.

Late political scientist L. Lipson observed, what we need these days is a change in our moral system- our actions and habits. If you let belief get in the driver’s seat, reason will take the back seat, you cannot go in two different directions at the same time. A democratic society cannot coexist with an undemocratic society. Traditionalists fight for what they believe, but a moral system that accepts violence cannot rise to a higher level of civilization. Differences must be complementary instead of divisive. If the divisive effects of the political and religious institutions can be eliminated humanity could reach a unity of mind. (The Ethical Crisis of Civilization, Sage 1993)

Philosopher of our time J. Habermas suggested that the “public sphere”, where public opinion is formed, was developed during the 18^th and 19^th centuries with the spread of media. Therefore, public opinion was discussed among the educated section of society. Later, democracy necessitated the inclusion of non-educated section, which had to be organized also by the educated lot. The public sphere became a space of conflict between the two sections of society, making the formation of public opinion difficult. Consequently, reconciliation of views was made in the government sphere.

A meaningful, conciliatory, rational debate needs commonality or at the least correspondence of understanding the notion of national interest. Disagreement on common good/interests means absence of common perception/understanding about its nature and purpose, hence absence of social cohesion/solidarity. Trust in each other, trust in rule of law, trust in common authority/government is lost. In the absence of such binding elements there cannot be a useful public and political debate about common interests, if any debate at all. Then democracy becomes dysfunctional, governance unsuccessful; authority and rule of law weakens. Public dissatisfaction with politicians becomes distrust in the democratic system which percolates to the media, then overflows to streets, a populist movement is thus put in motion. This is why populism is a product of democracy. The populist movement relies on divisions in society, like nationalism or religion, arouses fear from the existing system, then, claims to represent the whole of the population and democracy, and considers its mandate absolute. This is totalitarianism, the tyranny of masses. In power, it dismantles the existing system and finally rules in the chaos thus created. This is not a desired orderly adaptation to social change but the way to autocracy.

Account must be taken also of the fact that generally in any country, depending on the average age of population, 20 to 35% are not eligible to vote, and over 10% of eligible electors do not vote. That means, at least one third of any national population consists of people governed without representation but by the decisions of the two thirds. In this arithmetic, if any proportion above 30% is of irrational type, politics and rational governance is in danger.[iii]

The Pew Research survey in 2023 in 24 countries showed that competence and representation by politicians are the most important improvements needed in democracy and followed by better informed citizenry participating in democracy. The Spring 2021 survey in 16 countries by Pew Research indicates that 66% of people surveyed viewed “direct democracy” as solution. This may be a promising sign for fostering democracy’s future. But a functioning direct democracy requires the participation of educated, knowledgeable-in-civics citizens. The level of intellect and knowledge, especially civic and world knowledge defines the ability of society to rationalize and compromise, thus its adaptability to change.

As to the responsibility of the ruling authority, the effective involvement of government is unavoidable in adaptation to social change. It is the political authority’s preponderant responsibility to monitor and respond timely to public dissatisfaction with economic matters, with the quality of work conditions, with discrimination in all public life, with public safety, with the quality of education and public information, with public solidarity and trust in public authority, among others. Governments’ evident and prominent raison d’etre is to direct all national resources to the provision of safety and prosperity of people, accordingly to be constantly aware of society’s changing needs and when necessary to take timely measures to adapt the system to social change without disruption of peace. Governments’ sharing these tasks with civil society organizations all the way down to local levels is also effective for improving social solidarity, harmony and peace.

Whereas Pew Research reported a 2019 Global Party Survey by Norris, which listed 18 populist parties in Europe, of which only one was centrist, three leftists, the remainder rightist. "A survey of 36,000 respondents in 30 countries around the world carried out by the Open Society Foundations turned up an alarming statistic: Only a narrow majority among younger respondents believed that democracy was preferable to other systems of government. More than a third of respondents between 18 and 35 said they would support a strongman leader who would do away with elections and assemblies." (Chaos in Congress, Washington Post, Oct. 6, 2023). A survey in 24 countries published in February 2024 on the question of “Who likes authoritarianism?” found that a median of 31% of people surveyed support rule by a strong leader or by the military. In the US this support was 32%. Although this astounding support came from the group identified as “rightists or populists”, in the US it was from the politically considered “center”.

The clear and loud call for dictatorship heard from many democratically governed societies is a warning that democracy’s innate self-destructive nature is in full motion; it must be countered by strong leadership of the executive branch elected by the people, not by a dictator. Republic and democracy cannot self-defend; they can and must be defended by the active intervention of the people. This raises the question of whether the defense of democracy includes the enforcement of democracy.

IV.      The case for the US

In the case of the U.S., improving public knowledge to the level needed for a rational debate would be possible if both people and the ruling authority would agree on instituting a modernized national education policy. One particular area that needs to be defined and enforced more clearly is the exaggerated absolute interpretation of individual freedom and social equality (as distinct from economic equality) of some rights. Views and practices of a small minority that differ from the great majority have to be respected as facts, but they do not have to be imposed on the latter for special treatment in the name of equality.

In addition, strengthening the role of the ruling authority for defending democracy from morphing itself into populism (and beyond) needs a special and delicate consideration.

There is in the U.S. an insistent iteration, democracy is an experiment, or democracy needs to be defended or tended. These observations are true to the extent that they imply the frailty of democracy, but fall short of how it must be defended? Inherent vulnerabilities of democracy have been discussed in the latest entry in this Blog, including the need for constitutional changes regarding the election and judicial systems. People who choose democracy as their system of governance have to make sure that the organic and institutional system of democracy (legal system and government) not only deliver democracy’s promises but also protect it from falling victim to its own weaknesses. Otherwise, what is the point in voting for a self-destructive system? Is freedom and right to vote is also freedom and right to vote to kill democracy, an oxymoron or an absurdity of mass suicide? Democratic votes for dictatorship must be a pathological condition. People’s complaints, protests and votes for adaptation to social change by a strong hand should not be interpreted to mean a change by dictatorship. If those crying for change are sincerely democratic people, their cry for HELP must be for lifting up the stumbling democracy.

On public knowledge/education

As we have seen above in the main causes of the current social change and in the rational management of adaptation of institutions to the change, the fundamental problem of contemporary democratic system is the unsatisfactory level of education for a rational civic participation and duty. Democracy, where the population is the ruler, succeeds if at least the majority is knowledgeable about how to rule.

The modern era education policy developed by John Dewey was aimed basically at serving the national economy, presumably prosperity. As times evolved it must be time to reconsider whether the purpose of education policy must still be solely or mostly the national economy or should it include preparing responsible citizens for society. Neither the purpose nor policy of education should be the raising of children with parent’s ideological image. The purpose should be first and foremost to prepare children intellectually, emotionally, and behaviorally for future life, thus for social living, thus for civic life, thus for common good. When society prospers and is at peace, the individual will be prosperous and safe. If he is individually prosperous and safe in society where there is no prosperity and peace, he will be an outcast. Like P. Worsley wrote in Introducing Sociology, “Social organization cannot be reduced simply to an economic base”. (Penguin Books 1988).

R. Hutchins underlined this paradox of democracy, “The foundation of democracy is universal suffrage. It makes every man a ruler. If every man is a ruler, every man needs the education that rulers ought to have. The kind of education we accept now when everybody is destined to rule is fundamentally an extension of the kind that in Jefferson's time was thought suitable to those destined to labour not to rule. …

…. They often have an alternative conception of democracy, especially evident in much American political rhetoric, which can co-exist with widespread public ignorance and, indeed, illiteracy. …. Yet, this conception of democracy as a thing limited to participation in free elections requires neither education nor political responsibility. Mere participation in the electoral process of most of the world's free, democratic societies requires only the ability to make the mark of the illiterate when voting. …

The suggestion one sometimes hears that liberal education is not for ditch diggers or garbage collectors and the like can only be reconciled with a minimal, non-active conception of democracy. It must necessarily exclude them from consideration as active citizens having an intelligent contribution to political life.” (Harold Entwistle, Liberal Education: Elitist and Irrelevant to Everyday Life?, Paideusis 11(1), (Fall)1997)

J. Baldacchino also wrote in The Road Not Taken about Hutchins’ views expressed in 1935 Storrs Lectures at Yale in defense of his reforms. “‘Our erroneous notion of progress,’ Hutchins writes, ‘has thrown the classics and the liberal arts out of the curriculum, overemphasized the empirical sciences, and made education the servant of any contemporary movements in society, no matter how superficial.” (HUMANITAS, Volume VIII, No. 1, 1995, National Humanities Institute).

A. T. Kronman observed, “All liberal arts education … is a preparation for the ‘job’ of living. ….  in the organized provision of instruction in the meaning of life, fundamentalism now prevails in America without competitive challenge … In the hierarchy of academic authority and prestige, the humanities today stand at the bottom.” (Education’s End: Why our Colleges and Universities have given up on the Meaning of Life, Yale Un. Press 2007).

In 1983 a Presidential National Commission on Excellence in Education was convened to study the educational problems in the US. The Commission’s report, A Nation At Risk, The Imperative For Educational Reform, An Open Letter to the American People, was approved by the President for implementation by all relevant Departments. Because of its utmost importance and accuracy as well as its powerful validation of the objective of this essay, salient passages of the report are attached to this essay.

Fast forward, “America has fretted about academic standards at its public schools for decades. In 1983 the Department of Education released a landmark report, ‘A Nation at Risk’, which warned of a ‘rising tide of mediocrity’ in the country’s schools. The response was swift. Within five years 45 states raised graduation requirements; more than two dozen introduced other reforms, including more comprehensive curriculums and higher teachers’ salaries.” But as graduation requirements were toughened up, graduation rates went down.  With the introduction of the No Child Left Behind policy in 2002, schools with low graduation rates based on a standard evaluation grading became ineligible for federal financial assistance. Every Students Succeeds Act that replaced the NCLB act in 2013 abolished that standard evaluation and empowered states with making the evaluation and also introduced the possibility of parents’ involvement in local education policy. (The Economist March 10, 2024).

Consequently, States lowered the coursework grading to increase the graduation rate so as to continue to be eligible for federal financial support. Education fell in disarray. In the last couple of decades students have verbally and physically attacked teachers, brought guns to school, perpetrated mass shootings.

D. Dresang and J. Gosling’s excellent guide to American states and communities’ functioning, authoritatively asserts that citizens, who have wildly differing views can influence education in their state or district through the lobbying of their legislature or referenda. In fact, “Since mid-1980s, the religious right has targeted school board elections …. In order to shape curricula to fit with fundamentalist Christian doctrine.” (Politics and Policies, 4^th ed. Pearson Publishing 2004).

The inroads that religion found its way to education is the main obstacle in the way of reforming the education policy. Especially, the formal recognition of “Home education” by parents in an exosocial setting, possibly with fanatical or other dubious contents or methods, allows raising members unfit for advanced and democratic society. Primitive banishing books from school libraries, even burning books in this age are affront to humanity that traveled a long way on the rough road from medieval to advanced civilization. 

 Another attack on education is the idea that education creates classes and division in society, worsens inequality. They claim that liberal education is elitist; they even invented a term of their own to express that idea, “wokeness”. Such are, in and of themselves, attempts to exploit the mistakes or negligence of past governments elected as agents of society to govern.

There are other peculiarities of the current education system as we discover in some observers’ comments in media: “Only 22 percent of the nation’s workers use any math more advanced than fractions, and they typically occupy technical or skilled positions. That means more than three-fourths of the population spends painful years in school futzing with numbers when they could be learning something more useful.

I’m talking about applied logic. This branch of philosophy grows from the same mental tree as algebra and geometry but lacks the distracting foliage of numbers and formulas. Call it the art of thinking clearly. ….

Prioritizing higher-level numeracy over other forms of logical reasoning is not turning us into a nation of engineers and physicists. It’s letting us become a nation that can’t think straight. America’s Founders knew it would take educated citizens for this democratic republic to succeed. But nowhere did they mention the quadratic formula.” (The trouble with schools is too much math, Travis Meier, WPost February 6, 2024)

 “For more than 100 years, the United States has used a civics test as a gentle screen for naturalizing new citizens. The idea behind the brief exam is straightforward: To participate fully in the life of the republic, newcomers must first evince some knowledge of the values and mechanics of that republic. …

Although a 2018 poll found that only 1 in 3 Americans could pass, actual applicants receive the 100 possible questions in advance. Eighty-eight percent of aspiring citizens pass on the first try. …” (Why not require a civics test as a rite of passage for all Americans? Daniel Pink, WPost March 4, 2024)

We may conclude that the century old vocational education policy deprived of humanities education (in its modern sense) did not achieve equality in the economic field that it targeted. Instead, other archaic or regressive forces are seriously affecting the general social attitude of Americans.

The quality of education cannot improve so long as it is left to culturally diverse local authorities and to even more widely diverse parents. Education is a branch of social science; it must be taken with due scientific seriousness. Unification of the education system is of the utmost importance for social equality, trust and harmony, thus for a well-functioning democracy. To that end, the qualifications of teachers must be elevated and, commensurately, their salaries. With a lower level of teachers, you are bound to get a lowly educated population. The educational level of society cannot be improved without an army of highly educated teachers and a modern education policy.

It is not enough to dream of a perfect backyard with a landscape of beautiful roses, if you do not know how to raise roses, or to be a lucrative viner if you do not become a viniculturist. For the latter there is the science of viniculture and vinology. For a perfect rose backyard you also need to know how to feed, trim, and protect them from pests. If you do not, you may bulldoze your backyard and start again with reliance only on over-confidence in your dream and maybe your resources. This may incidentally put you in a vicious circle, like the hamster running happily in his wheel forever proud of himself.

Government’s duty is not to perpetuate and rule over a mediocre society or to serve society’s addiction to tradition, or backwardness; its duty is to elevate, to advance society. Academia, business sector, and civil society organizations must all demand, assist and support government efforts to develop and to implement an education policy for democracy’s success for achieving prosperity and peace. 

Conclusion

There may not be doubt that we have been in the middle of a social change since the 1960s, which understandably may have been unnoticeable or seen as an ephemeral phenomenon during its first two decades because of the excitement (or was it the pink glasses euphoria) brought by the technological leap and globalization. During the following two decades (1981-00) international terrorism may have distracted concerns away from domestic issues. Why look into these developments with the two decades (vicennia) measure? Because two decades brings to power a new generation, after having the chance to try possibly two opposing or different political approaches by way of elections carried out during that period. Governments of the first two vicennia may be excused for being blind-sided to social change. But governments of the third vicennia (2001-20) cannot be excused for having taken their eyes off the ball and not adapting the sociopolitical system to changing conditions. Therefore, in the current vicennia governments have no choice but to give priority to the social effects of fast developing technology and international affairs.

The deterioration of international security triggered by the insatiable appetite of dictators, and domestic discomforts triggered by incessant migration are getting worse. People might lose patience and hope for a rational transition of the political system to conform to social change. That public feeling might translate into revolution, not of the type of 18^th and 19^th centuries, but one befitting the 21^st, because the mentality of people and the power of rule of law have changed since (although January 6, 2021 insurrection in the U.S. was an anachronic enactment of Bastille). Endless public demonstrations and dissatisfaction reflected in elections around the world during and since the last vicennia are, in fact, a revolution to find an “agent” to do the job. People opt to bring to power extremist, disruptive governments to bring about adaptation to social change by force.

There is, however, still one possibility for achieving a smooth and peaceful adaptation to social change. People in democratic countries determined to hold on to democracy elect populist autocrats to uphold democracy. This paradox suggests that they expect democracy to be administered by force, that it be enforced. After all, when people elect a democratic government, they do not give mandate just to administer democratic policies without securing democracy itself. Democracy cannot work if there is no democracy. The democratic mandate necessarily includes protecting democracy against democracy’s inherent vulnerabilities, which includes pseudo-democratic nationalist populism. After all, people entrust their power to government to implement democracy and provide the services they expect. They will replace the government if it misuses that power, so must they when government does not use that power where and when it is needed the most. Elected politicians, without further delay, must carry out a rational and peaceful adaptation to social change with effective and determined implementation of democracy.

In closing, it remains to speculate whether both the American people and any future US administrations will tackle bold and difficult actions clearly needed to achieve communal solidarity, civic trust, economic and gender equality, and at the root of all higher level of knowledge of people with an effective determination. If history were the measure, politicians would not have the wisdom and courage to assume the assignment of revolutionary agency to undertake it. The foregoing thoughts might then be destined to be nothing more than a pipe dream.

November 2024

End Notes

^[i]“As one man whose dad abandoned him lamented on Fathers’ Day in 2008: [Fathers] are teachers and coaches. They are mentors and role models. They are examples of success and the men who constantly push us toward it. But if we are honest with ourselves, we’ll admit that what too many fathers also are missing—missing from too many lives and too many homes. They have abandoned their responsibilities, acting like boys instead of men. And the foundations of our families are weaker because of it. The speaker is now president of the United States—plenty of fatherless boys turn out fine. But his point, which is echoed by many more conservative thinkers, is sound. There are many ways to be a man, but not all of them are equally honourable.” (Men adrift, Badly educated men in rich countries have not adapted well to trade, technology or feminism, The Economist, May 28, 2015)

[ii] A selection of the US Bureau of Statistics for May 2023: 211.2k Chief executives $259k/yr, 15.1k Cardiologists $423.2k/yr, 1.1K Pediatric surgeons $449.3k/yr, 4.1k Oral surgeons $334.3k/yr, 112.0k Physicians $240.7k/yr, 93.6K pilots $250.0k/yr, 14.9k athletes $328.8k/yr, scientists (from anthropologist to physicist) $69.7 to 158.0k/yr, 32.4k legislators $68k/yr, Entertainment attendants $32.2k/yr, Park attendants $32.7k/yr, life guards $31.3k/yr, restaurant workers $30.7 to 32.9k/yr.

[iii] “Anti-establishment theme is the fuel of populist movement … “populism is a … thin-centered ideology that considers society to be ultimately separated into two homogeneous and antagonistic groups, “the pure people” versus the “corrupt elite,” and which argues that politics should be an expression of the volonté générale (general will) of the people. … Consequently, populists seek to change the status quo with “a claim to legitimacy that rests on the democratic ideology of popular sovereignty and majority rule,” that is, a return to a “true” representation led by “the people” and not by professional political elites (Canovan 2002). But who are “the people?” (Yuchen Luo, We Got Our Guy!: Populist Attitudes after Populists Gain Power, https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0923-7245 yuchen.luo@nyu.edu,

ATTACHMENT

Nation at Risk (excerpts)

Letter of Transmittal

The Commission deeply believes that the problems we have discerned in

American education can be both understood and corrected if the people of

our country, together with those who have public responsibility in the

matter, care enough and are courageous enough to do what is required.

Each member of the Commission appreciates your leadership in having

asked this diverse group of persons to examine one of the central issues

which will define our Nation's future. We especially welcomed your

confidence throughout the course of our deliberations and your anticipation

of a report free of political partisanship.

Report

Introduction

The Commission was created as a result of the Secretary's concern about…

the widespread public perception that something is seriously remiss in our

educational system. ….

A Nation At Risk

All, regardless of race or class or economic status, are entitled to a fair

chance and to the tools for developing their individual powers of mind and

spirit to the utmost. This promise means that all children by virtue of their

own efforts, competently guided, can hope to attain the mature and

informed judgement needed to secure gainful employment, and to manage

their own lives, thereby serving not only their own interests but also the

progress of society itself.

Our Nation is at risk. Our once unchallenged preeminence in commerce,

industry, science, and technological innovation is being overtaken by

competitors throughout the world. This report is concerned with only one of

the many causes and dimensions of the problem, but it is the one that

undergirds American prosperity, security, and civility. We report to the

American people that while we can take justifiable pride in what our schools

and colleges have historically accomplished and contributed to the United

States and the well-being of its people, the educational foundations of our

society are presently being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity that

threatens our very future as a Nation and a people. What was unimaginable

a generation ago has begun to occur--others are matching and surpassing

our educational attainments. …

On the occasion of the Commission's first meeting, President Reagan noted

the central importance of education in American life when he said: "Certainly

there are few areas of American life as important to our society, to our

people, and to our families as our schools and colleges." This report,

therefore, is as much an open letter to the American people as it is a report

to the Secretary of Education. We are confident that the American people,

properly informed, will do what is right for their children and for the

generations to come.

The Risk

A high level of shared education is essential to a free, democratic society and to the fostering of a common culture, especially in a country that prides itself on pluralism and individual freedom.

For our country to function, citizens must be able to reach some common

understandings on complex issues, often on short notice and on the basis of

conflicting or incomplete evidence. Education helps form these common

understandings, a point Thomas Jefferson made long ago in his justly famous

dictum:

I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the

people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise

their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from

them but to inform their discretion. ……

Indicators of the Risk

The educational dimensions of the risk before us have been amply

documented in testimony received by the Commission. For example:

● International comparisons of student achievement, completed a

decade ago, reveal that on 19 academic tests American students were

never first or second and, in comparison with other industrialized

nations, were last seven times.

● Some 23 million American adults are functionally illiterate by the

simplest tests of everyday reading, writing, and comprehension. .…

● Many 17-year-olds do not possess the "higher order" intellectual skills

we should expect of them. Nearly 40 percent cannot draw inferences

from written material; only one-fifth can write a persuasive essay; and

only one-third can solve a mathematics problem requiring several steps. ….

Some worry that schools may emphasize such rudiments as reading

and computation at the expense of other essential skills such as

comprehension, analysis, solving problems, and drawing conclusions. Still

others are concerned that an overemphasis on technical and occupational

skills will leave little time for studying the arts and humanities that so enrich

daily life, help maintain civility, and develop a sense of community.

Knowledge of the humanities, they maintain, must be harnessed to science

and technology if the latter are to remain creative and humane, just as the

humanities need to be informed by science and technology if they are to

remain relevant to the human condition. …..

Learning Society

….. creating a Learning Society. At the heart of such a society is the

commitment to a set of values and to a system of education that affords all

members the opportunity to stretch their minds to full capacity, from early

childhood through adulthood, learning more as the world itself changes. …

In our view, formal schooling in youth is the essential foundation for learning throughout     one's life. But without life-long learning, one's skills will become rapidly dated.

In contrast to the ideal of the Learning Society, however, we find that for too

many people education means doing the minimum work necessary for the

moment, then coasting through life on what may have been learned in its

first quarter. But this should not surprise us because we tend to express our

educational standards and expectations largely in terms of "minimum

requirements." And where there should be a coherent continuum of

learning, we have none, ….

The Public's Commitment

Of all the tools at hand, the public's support for education is the most

powerful……….

The most recent (1982) Gallup Poll of the Public's Attitudes Toward the

Public Schools strongly supported a theme heard during our hearings:

People are steadfast in their belief that education is the major foundation for

the future strength of this country.

Recommendations

….. We must demand the best effort and performance from all students, whether they are gifted or less able, affluent or disadvantaged, whether destined for college, the farm, or industry.

Our recommendations are based on the beliefs that everyone can learn, that

everyone is born with an urge to learn which can be nurtured, that a solid

high school education is within the reach of virtually all, and that life-long

learning will equip people with the skills required for new careers and for

citizenship. ……..

Implementing Recommendations

4. In addition, we believe the Federal Government's role includes several functions of national consequence that States and localities alone are unlikely to be able to meet: protecting constitutional and civil rights for students and school personnel; collecting data, statistics, and information about education generally; supporting curriculum improvement and research on teaching, learning, and the management of schools; supporting teacher training in areas of critical shortage or key national needs; and providing student financial assistance and research and graduate training. We believe the assistance of the Federal Government should be provided with a minimum of administrative burden and intrusiveness.

5. The Federal Government has the primary responsibility to identify the national interest in education. It should also help fund and support efforts to protect and promote that interest. It must provide the national leadership to ensure that the Nation's public and private resources are marshaled to address the issues discussed in this report. …..

To Parents

….. your right to a proper education for your children carries a double responsibility. As surely as you are your child's first and most influential teacher, your child's ideas about education and its significance begin with you. You must be a living example of what you expect your children to honor and to emulate. Moreover, you bear a responsibility to participate actively in your child's education. ….

Above all exhibit a commitment to continued learning in your own life

---