Bill's Views on Most Everything

As our American democracy comes under threat, I want to look at worldwide democracy versus autocracy.  Both models can be traced throughout human history.  The first recorded democracy was Athens around 500 BCE.  All citizens voted on each issue.  Citizens were men, no slaves or women allowed.  About 30% of the population voted.  Other Greek city-states also adopted the system and it lasted until Alexander took over.

Many primitive cultures were and are democratic.  Everyone has a say, and strong leaders were called on only in times of crisis.  Problem is, once a guy gets a taste of power, he wants to hold on to his power and maybe expand his reach.  Crisis becomes the rationale for retaining single man rule.  Note I use male pronouns, women in leadership positions were and are rare.

Men have a tendency to want to be in charge.  One strong personality can marshal support by offering a share of the plunder of war or land in the kingdom.  He whips the opposition (there is always opposition) and consolidates his rule.  Succession can be difficult, so rulers tried to create family dynasties.  This often met with some success, but not without turmoil inside and outside the dynasty.  They all eventually fail, with as many reasons as there are dynasties.

The dynasties tend to be bad neighbors, so warfare ensues, reinforcing the justification for autocracy out of self-defense.  Dynasties lead to imperialism, with the result of imposing autocracy on other countries.  The other countries don’t like outside rule, so as soon as they can they throw the autocrats out.

Another side effect of autocracy is corruption.  The autocratic class wants the power and wealth for themselves, thus restricting opportunity for advancement to an elite.  Everyone else wants to advance as well, so they cheat.  Black markets, smuggling, illegal cartels, organized crime, and bribery flourish.  The rulers resort to repression, exacerbating the situation.  Things get to the point where it is difficult to do most anything without bribery or other corrupt activity.  Economies like this tend to stagnate, leading to more unrest.

Racism is also a major factor.  The rulers always had pejorative names for the indigenous people, who were denied the opportunities enjoyed by the colonists.  The former Spanish and Portuguese colonies were the victims of rulers interested only in gold and souls.  It was necessary to cheat do do anything also.The French, Belgian, and Dutch colonies were exploited for resources and the rulers were just plain nasty.

Eventually the bad guys get thrown out, often replaced by another set of bad guys.  The rhetoric may be different, and lip service paid to democracy, but as all they have known is authoritarian rule, its mostly business as usual.  Some of the former British colonies did manage to become democratic, the USA, Canada, Australia, Botswana, India, and New Zealand, for example, but Uganda, Pakistan, and Zimbabwe, among others, remain under authoritarian rule.

What is needed for democracy to take hold?    Education, a tradition of opportunity to advance in the system, and most importantly, some wealth.  At the time of the American Revolution, the thirteen colonies had the highest per capita income in the world.  The other English-speaking colonies also had England’s democratic tradition.  India had Gandhi.

Democracies can also move to tyranny.  Fear tends to be the catalyst.  Many post-colonial countries started independence as democracies, but without any democratic tradition and the difficulties encountered in the transition, strongmen saw the opportunity to take over.  Many of them came from the military.  People initially accepted authoritarian rule in the hope of having stability and economic growth.

Many of the post-Soviet countries started as democracies, but strongmen soon took over.  They offered stability.  The two biggest and most dangerous retreats from democracy came in Weimar Germany and post-Soviet Russia.  Let’s look at them in turn.  Germany had several destabilizing conditions.  There was no well-developed democratic tradition.  Germany wasn’t unified until 1871.  There was an elected government, but the Kaiser and Bismarck called the shots.  After their defeat in The Great War, the reparations required by the Treaty of Versailles impoverished the nation.  The Weimar Republic was unable to lift the country out of a horrible depression.

Hitler, with his authoritarian approach fueled by fear generated by soaring unemployment coupled with propaganda blaming Jews rather than an onerous treaty led to his appointment as Chancellor in 1933.  Hindenburg was President, but the Nazis had strength in the Reichstag and an aging and weakened Hindenburg.

Hitler began by ignoring the treaty and began rearming the country which led to a return of economic stability.  His propaganda apparatus was effective in building a deep reservoir of support for his regime.  All his Master Race propaganda along with scapegoating Jews justified his expansionism, first in Austria then in the Czechoslovakian Sudetenland with its large German speaking population.

The non-aggression pact with Stalin and weak outside resistance led to the most destructive war in history.  The people had jobs, though.  Fear, propaganda, thuggery, and militarism set up the war.  Churchill’s refusal to cave in was what eventually led to Hitler’s defeat.  Oh, and Soviet resistance coupled with America entering the war overwhelmed the Wehrmacht.

When the Soviet Union disintegrated in 1991, it came after a period of growing nationalism in the subject states and a weakened Soviet government.  The Soviet State overreached in the arms race with the U.S. and the planned economy was causing unrest.  The reasons are more complex, but I have gone on too long anyway.

Latin America is another autocratic region with only a few exceptions, like Costa Rica.  The Spanish and Portuguese regimes were interested in two things: gold, and souls for the Church.  If someone wanted to significantly get ahead, it was necessary to cheat.  Indigenous people essentially had no rights.  When independence came, power shifted from Iberia to local ethnic European elites.  Things eventually get so bad the indigenous people revolt.  Usually a leftist autocracy results with a brief democratic interlude.  Even this change was often thwarted by U. S. Intervention.  The American government wanted stability and such things as human rights were ignored.

After the breakup and an attempt to build democracy, the Russian economy was horribly weakened.  There was much unemployment, and the government was attempting to wean the Russian people from their beloved vodka.  Fear and anger resulted in a return to strongman rule.  Democracy just does not take hold in a nation that had always had autocracy.

The western democracies tend to be fairly stable, but are vulnerable to bad neighbors.  There is always a right wing wanting to take over and destroy democracy.  The right gains strength when there is a source of fear.  Currently the influx of middle eastern refugees threatens to destabilize Europe.  Again, the underlying cause is racism and religious discrimination. The U.S. is currently experiencing the same phenomenon.  Racism and fear underlying the cry to Make America Great Again.  Great means white with tight control over those other people, especially ones from “shit countries”.

Hey, I have gone on way too long ranting about this stuff.  Problem for me is also fear that maybe the bad guys will really take over.

If you think I am obsessed with earthquakes, you are right.  I think the ground under me should stay still.  We already have enough trouble with the weather, let’s not have the earth move as well.  I am sure most people agree with me, especially those who live in earthquake prone areas.  The bulk of the population live in earthquake country because tectonic plate boundaries tend to be on sea coasts where most people live.

I don’t live in quake country.  Denver is fairly stable since the Rocky Mountains stopped rising.  There are lots of faults around and faults mean one area moves relative to another.  The mountains are lighter as they wear away and tend to pop up a little out of the thick, semi molten stuff down there.  So, motion and stress on the faults, therefore shaking.  It doesn’t happen very often.

When the Army started pumping toxic chemicals into the ground under Rocky Mountain Arsenal, the liquid lubricated some old faults and vertical cracks in the ancient rock at the bottom of the 12,000 foot well and what stress there was let go.  Denver experienced around 700 earthquakes, most of them minor but disturbing to the population near the Arsenal.  There were two quakes above magnitude five resulting in minor structural damage and broken glass near the Arsenal.

As you might expect, voices were raised.  Injection wells were used in other places with no surface consequences, so the shaking at the Arsenal came as a surprise.  There was a clear correlation between waste injection and quakes, so injection stopped. The stuff injected was pretty nasty, and other means were used to dispose of what was left after the Well was shut down.

I am not sure pumping toxic stuff into the earth is a good idea anywhere, even if it is thousands of feet down.  Toxic water can be treated, but the toxins don’t go away.  They have to go somewhere.  Sometimes they can be incinerated, sometimes buried, but they are still around.  We are doing a good job at fouling our nest, the only one we have.

Some evangelicals don’t think there is any problem because the planet’s days are numbered and we were given dominion over the land until then.  But, what if what they say are prophesies  are wrong?  These beliefs underpin some of the dismantling of environmental safeguards going on these days. I suspect the real reason is not theology, but greed.