Democracy is inherently combustible. The idea that people from all backgrounds can peacefully select and manage their government was heresy when our country was founded and remains a revolutionary notion today.
We need look no further than the recent violence surrounding independence referendums in Iraq and Spain to see the precarious position democracies inhabit, always balancing the inviolable rights of individuals against the unavoidable tendency for majoritarian factions to usurp power.
Democracies persevere only so long as citizens feel a deep and abiding connection to the shared set of rights and values that define a national vision larger and more meaningful than that of any single faction.
The independence referendums reflect a failure to inspire confidence the countries’ democratic ideals hold equally valid for all people.
In Iraq for example, the central government (dominated by Shia Arabs) has routinely violated Iraq’s constitution, supporting militias despite a prohibition against such activity for example, to the detriment of groups such as the Kurds. These violations were documented by former U.S. Ambassador Robert Ford in an article published last month in a London-based newspaper and they exacerbate historical abuses suffered by Kurds at the hands of Saddam Hussein and his Sunni Arab regime.
Similarly, the secessionist movement in Catalonia builds on historic grievances.
Dictator Francisco Franco attempted to suppress Catalonian culture during his four-decade-long rule, going so far as to ban any use of the Catalonian regional dialect. In the past several years, there have been political flashpoints (in 2010 a Spanish court reversed some of the autonomy previously granted to the region) and economic tension (Catalonia is one of highest-producing regions in Spain and a bright spot post-Great Recession in a country where unemployment has hovered above 20 percent) that have exacerbated long-standing disputes.
When one or several factions within a population receive preference, when Arab Iraqis fail to uphold constitutional obligations to Kurdish Iraqis, for example, faith in the system breaks down.
With the collapse of confidence, factional identities take on oppositional undertones – being Kurdish means one cannot be Iraqi and being Catalonian means one cannot be Spanish (and vice-versa).
In such an environment, it is not surprising referendums would support independence.
In the Kurdish vote on Sept. 25, about 3 million people voted (turnout above 70 percent), with over 92 percent in favor.
In the Catalonian vote on Oct. 1, approximately 2.2 million people voted (turnout about 43 percent), with almost 90 percent in favor. Chaos now reigns in both countries, with the Iraqi army seizing the oil-rich city of Kirkuk and the Spanish prime minister threatening to take over Catalonia.
Many of the forces contributing to democracy’s collapse in Iraq and Spain, such as gross income and wealth inequality and systemic racial discrimination, are evident today in our own country.
In order to prevent a descent into extreme factionalism, we must work together to renew our shared faith in our democratic principles and constitutional framework.
We can start by ending the systematic abuse of one of our most basic and essential rights – the right to vote.
Whether in the guise of overt voter suppression on the basis of race or the rigging of voting districts in favor of a certain political party, it is far too often true that Americans are prevented from meaningfully exercising their right to shape their government.
Consider the proposal put together by Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, vice chairman of President Trump’s commission on election integrity, to amend federal law to promote policies requiring new voters to provide proof of citizenship when registering to vote.
This proposal, recently revealed through an ACLU voting-rights lawsuit, would overtly discriminate against citizens who have lost or misplaced certain documents and would send the chilling signal there is a higher burden of proof only some Americans have to meet in order to vote.
We must reject this and any such proposal that segregates citizens’ access to the ballot.
In addition to ensuring access to the voting booth, we need to make sure votes cast actually count.
On Oct. 3, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in Gill v. Whitford, a case from Wisconsin that concerns the constitutionality of partisan gerrymandering. This case presents a rare and powerful opportunity for the court to impose reasonable limits on the extent to which any political party can design voting districts so as to maximize certain political outcomes. (In Wisconsin, one political party was able to win 60 of 99 legislative seats with only 48.6 percent of the overall vote.)
Protecting the right to vote and limiting partisan gerrymandering are critical to countering factionalism and building a strong shared sense of national identity.
It is said that Benjamin Franklin, when asked by a group of citizens what kind of government the Constitutional Convention of 1787 had created, responded “a republic if you can keep it.”
Apocryphal or not, the story underscores how there is no autopilot with our democracy. Injustices do not dissipate of their own volition and rights do not assert themselves without citizen-agitation.
It is the challenge of every generation to invigorate our democracy by fighting against discriminatory practices that promote factionalism and by expanding the ways in which people can participate in crafting our government.
(Dan Vallone is a West Point graduate who served six years on active duty as an infantry officer. He lives in Concord.)