Alexandra Berardelli ‘25
Chief Opinions Editor
Dictator or Democracy? If you’ve taken a stroll on Pakachoag Street recently, you might have seen lawn signs and flags concerning the upcoming presidential election. I saw this question on a couple of signs — Dictator or Democracy? — and it made me think about our role in preserving our American democracy.
On Wednesday, September 11, twenty-three years after the terrorist attack, the Democratic Futures Forum (DFF) held a panel entitled “What Democracy Means to Us.” Sponsored by the McFarland Center for Religion, Ethics, and Culture, this question brought quite a stellar group of scholars together, moderated by Director Tom Landy. Presented in no particular order here, these professors and administrators took a stab at voicing their views on democracy: Professors Gregory Burnep (Political Science), Diana Dukhanova (Russian Studies and Montserrat), Mary Ebbott (Classics), Daniel Klinghard (Political Science), Katherine Lu Hsu (Classics), Charles Todd (Dean of Students), and President Vincent Rougeau.
The discussion was lively, prioritizing a bird’s eye view of democracy. Drawing on each speaker and considering my experiences as an American, I’ve pondered the question — What does Democracy mean to you? — and the answer is inherently complex. For starters, democracy should be considered the expression of community: there is a sense of commitment to national and personal communities. However, personal, even selfish motives may contribute to breaking up the nature of democracy, as you may observe in national politics.
When considering the spirit of community and politics, democracy is not all about voting, especially not only in presidential elections. To enhance democracy and preserve it—or at least try to—means actively participating in our local communities by voting in local elections or joining local committees. Professor Burnep began the panel by strongly advocating for this. He noted that he’s more excited about his local elections than this presidential one. I would argue that many of us at Holy Cross are not inclined to participate in local politics. It’s not necessarily a bad thing — for now — but Burnep’s vibrant remarks about the local community set the tone for the rest of the talk. Perhaps there was even a sense of hope: we don’t see it yet, but hopefully, there will be a point for us to each have the privilege to participate in local politics and make meaningful contributions to these communities. I hope our American democracy and I will make it to that point. At the current moment, through forceful media and on campus discourse, we are hyper fixated on the national stage.
Each of the speakers made meaningful contributions, some drawing on philosophical and historical contexts, others theorizing about the fundamental concepts of democracy, most notably President Rougeau’s three p’s: participation, promise, and pluralism. I would love to talk more about interpretations and critiques of specific points, especially some of the philosophical and classical references, but there is not nearly enough time for that. It would be a great opportunity for some vibrant dialogue among ourselves, though!
Overall, this talk was to understand why democracy matters and why we need to remind others that it matters. Yet, I can’t help feeling that we’re back in our ivory tower. The bird’s eye view is nice, but I do not understand how productive this conversation is for us. Is it meant to be productive? I would hope so, but I don’t know. As liberal arts students, we are trained in many disciplines, emphasizing the importance of studying history, philosophy, and ethics, among others, to gain a diverse perspective of our world. I came to this talk to see our democracy continue to exist, but I want to know what feasible manners I could take. Aside from participating in local communities, I gained much more theoretical knowledge than I was looking for.
At the end of the Q&A, a professor asked the question that everyone was thinking about: Well, what about Trump? It was decided that democracy is also something of a compromise, and Trump objectively rejects the fundamental principle of disagreement and loss. And, with the political scene becoming more polarized than ever, Trump is not the only person. So, then the question becomes this: Is there an end to democracy? I’m leaning towards yes, but it’s only a matter of time. In many of my Classics courses, I have read accounts concerning tense political climates, some ending in an overwhelming tyranny. And, I can’t help but wonder if we’re next. My frustration with the current political scene and the upcoming presidential election drives my pessimistic view of the future of our American democracy. I will admit, however, that there is room for improvement in guiding younger people as to why our democracy matters in the first place. As time passes, fewer people learn about the fundamentals of democracy. I do not think younger people will necessarily want to learn about the history and different theories, as many liberal arts students will. Still, we must at least try to teach them about the privileges of having a democracy to make sure we do not see the end of our democracy, at least not in our lifetime. But, the question should never be Dictator or Democracy?
Featured image courtesy of College of the Holy Cross
Leave a Reply