Serious students of American politics understand that the United States is confronted with a number of domestic problems that have imperiled the "American Dream." They range from a dysfunctional political system that has been largely purchased by the I%, to extreme economic inequality, a miserly social safety network, crumbling infrastructure, banks too big to fail, rampant gun violence, and severe weather episodes caused by climate change, to name only a few.
In
this election year, however, not even one of those concerns have been addressed
by the leaders of the Republican Party or by any of its presidential
candidates. Instead, the GOP establishment continues to march in lock-step with
Ronald Reagan's nonsensical argument that government is the problem and not the
answer, and that reducing burdensome government
regulations will expand the freedom of all Americans to make personal
decisions in their own best interests. Notably missing from discussions of that
received article of faith is any recognition of Isaiah Berlin's observation
that "freedom for the wolves has often meant death for the sheep."
In the past two years, GOP legislators in Georgia, North Carolina, Indiana, and Mississippi have introduced and supported sweeping and intrusive legislation that would require transgender people, under the penalties of prosecution, to use public bathrooms that are consonant with the biological sexual identity with which they were born. In the face of strong opposition - particularly from corporations - GOP Governors in Georgia and Indiana reluctantly vetoed the proposed legislation Still undeterred, GOP state legislators in Tennessee, Kansas, South Carolina and Minnesota are now trying to enact similar legislation in their states.
In North Carolina, Governor Pat McCrory signed into law legislation that became effective April 1 st.. The statute in North Carolina, besides regulating the use of public restrooms, bans all common law actions that raise claims of discrimination based upon age, sex, race, sexual orientation or disability.
"I do believe in our high schools, in our middle schools, in our universities, we should continue to have the tradition that we've been having in this country for years. And we have a women's facility and a men's facility. You know, it's worked out pretty well. And I don't think we need any further government interference," Republican Gov. Pat McCrory said on "Meet the Press."
In Mississippi, GOP Governor Phil Bryant signed a law last month that allows government employees to refuse to issue marriage licenses or perform marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples and that allows businesses and faith-based groups to deny housing, jobs and adoption and foster-care services to people based on their sexual orientation. The bill overwhelmingly passed the Mississippi House by an 85-24 vote and by a vote of 31-17 in the Senate.
Among Democratic legislators who opposed the bill, Democratic Senator John Horhn insisted that the bill was inherently discriminatory and he urged his GOP colleagues to examine their consciences and to show empathy. "I have experienced discrimination, as many African Americans have - can't you see how this legislation might be seen as discriminatory?" he asked.
The GOP supporters of Mississippi's self-styled "Religious Liberty Accommodations Act" claim that the act is meant to protect people, businesses, and organizations with "sincerely held" religious beliefs about the sanctity of traditional marriage. The newly-enacted law also proclaims that gender is determined by "an individual's immutable biological sex as objectively determined by anatomy and genetics at time of birth."
Last month also, Indiana GOP Governor Mike Pence, after having cravenly capitulated to corporate pressure over the transgender legislation, signed into law a bill that made Indiana the second state in the nation to ban abortion because of a fetal abnormality. The measure also criminalizes the procedure when motivated solely because of factors such as the fetus's sex or race. Pence described the law as a "comprehensive pro-life measure that affirms the value of all human life" in a statement.
The head of Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky condemned the bill. "It is clear the governor is more comfortable practicing medicine without a license than behaving a responsible lawyer, as he picks and chooses which constitutional rights are appropriate," Betty Cockrum said in a statement reported by the Associated Press.
NPR's Jennifer Ludden reports that, "North Dakota was the first state to pass such a ban, in 2013, although abortion providers say it's difficult to enforce. The law depends on a woman declaring the anomaly as her reason to abort. Indiana's law is much more expansive since it also bans abortion based on race, sex, national origin, ancestry and color." In addition, the bill holds doctors legally liable for such abortions. Additionally, according to The New York Times "the law restricts fetal tissue donation and requires doctors performing abortions to have admitting privileges at a hospital or to have an agreement with a doctor who does."
How then does one reconcile the paradox? If, as the GOP contends, government minimalism in all levels of economic and social life is the antidote to what ails the United States, why then should any of the fifty states be given carte blanche to intrude into the pelvises, uteri and vaginas of every American man and women?
Part
of the answer to that paradox may be found in this country's legacy of extreme
individualism. Well documented by Harvard University's Robert Puttnam and by other researchers, the
effects of that legacy have exacerbated a sense of social isolation, fear, and
vulnerability among many Americans and contributed to a precipitous dease in community and civic involvement.
In Escape From Freedom, Erich Fromm noted that as "the individual became more alone, isolated, became an instrument in the hands of overwhelmingly strong forces outside himself; he became an 'individual' but a bewildered and insecure individual." The result, as Fromm put it, is the temptation for the self to surrender its autonomy "to give up his freedom, to try to overcome his aloneness, to eliminate the gap which has arisen between the individual and the world." Hence, the danger increases that, as individuals feel more alone, more isolated, more alienated, and more vulnerable, they will succumb to the blandishments of demagogues and snake-oil salesmen who are only able to wield power by appeals to divisive wedge issues that play upon our innermost anxieties, worries and prejudices.
The attendant fear, that forces more powerful than the self pose a greater threat to personal autonomy, may, in large part, explain the anger, frustration, and vitriol first exemplified by the Tea Party movement, that first came to prominence in the summer of 2009 and which continues to dominate political discourse to the present. It is also a truism that bewildered and insecure individuals are easily manipulated.
So long as ordinary Americans remain collectively fearful, distracted, incensed by social issues that have no relevance whatsoever to the their unmet needs, and persuaded that they are powerless to change the status quo, those who control the levers of American economic and political power will continue to shape the narrative and control the outcomes of public policy debates.