 |
| Getty images |
By Peter Y. Paik
 |
However, the deep and widespread pessimism in the West about the future of democracy may have deeper roots than simply a momentary loss of confidence, as Rowan implies.
Indeed, the second President of the United States, John Adams, famously drew attention to the fragility of democracy, observing that "democracy never lasts long," and that every democracy in history had committed suicide.
Adams went further, observing that it is wrong to view democracy as "less vain, less proud, less ambitious or less avaricious" than aristocracy or monarchy. Democracy, indeed, could be even more dangerous, since in an aristocracy, the desire for power is limited to a smaller number of individuals. Democracy, by contrast, extend the desire for power over the entire population.
Such judgments find backing in history. For democracies have been rare in the history of civilization ― the overwhelming majority of human beings have lived under the rule of kings and emperors. In the case of Athens, taken as the model and example for the values of freedom and equality, Adams notes that it was the people's belief in democracy that led the city into wars that it could not win. Having wasted the flower of its youth, Athens was conquered by the king of Macedon.
The most famous criticisms of democracy are found in Plato. It was a democracy that after all condemned Socrates to death. Nevertheless, it is instructive to revisit the attack on democracy in the Republic. In that dialogue, democracy is the form of government that exists before the arrival of tyranny.
Indeed, Socrates implies that democracy is a mere transitional stage between oligarchy, the rule of the rich, and the tyranny of rule by a violent man without self-control and without moral restraints. The tyrant will deliberately impoverish the people, hire foreign mercenaries to be his bodyguards, and murder the best citizens because he fears they will use their talents against him.
As much as tyranny appears to be the complete antithesis of democracy, Socrates notes that the tyrant is the child of democracy. The freedom and equality upheld by democracy over time creates instability, chaos, and conflict, causing the people to look for a strong leader to protect them, even if he is a murderous brute.
Equality, Socrates tells us, has the effect of erasing basic social differences. A society that condemns the idea of any kind of inequality cannot avoid destroying all standards of excellence. It turns the child into the equal of the parent, and the teacher into the equal of the student.
Thus, fathers become afraid to discipline their sons. Teachers flatter their students and become too afraid to correct their mistakes. The old become frivolous like the young, while the young feel entitled to wield power over their elders.
Democracy, in allowing people to live as they please, comes to reject all standards of excellence. In the absence of higher values, freedom and equality poison the society. Freedom justifies not improving oneself or helping others. Equality provides one with a ready excuse to reject the views of others, no matter how insightful they are.
But if democracy has a short lifespan, then how has democracy in America lasted for as long as it has? Was John Adams being excessively pessimistic about the country he helped to found?
The French aristocrat Alexis de Tocqueville, who marveled at the tremendous freedom Americans were able to enjoy, wondered why a society based on such radical ideas did not fall apart into chaos and strife. Indeed, from his standpoint in the 1840s, the country had a bright and glorious future ahead of it.
What American democracy had, and which Athens did not, was a religion that taught the citizens to check their destructive ambitions, to serve the common good, and to be honest in their business dealings. Americans could enjoy freedom of speech because they trusted one other and because they shared common values rooted in their religion.
The waning of religious faith thus must be reckoned as a decisive factor in the loss of confidence in democracy. As President Adams wrote, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other."
Peter Yoonsuk Paik (pypaik@gmail.com) is a researcher in literature and philosophy at Yonsei University. The views expressed in the article are the author's own and do not reflect the editorial direction of The Korea Times.
![[INTERVIEW] 'Now is time for Koreans to unlock potential in Africa'](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/9236a17d88ea472b862b237c9788069d.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
![[INTERVIEW] Meet the man behind giant rubber ducks that once took over Seoul](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/df32c60c8204448e98ccdb9841366bec.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
