On Social Homogeneity, Coherence and Democracy
I have never believed that democracy brings progress. I know it to have brought regression. Lee Kwan Yew.
Western governments are in crisis for familiar reasons: rising wealth and income inequality, falling quality of life, non-responsive governments, immigrant violence, national debt, obsolescent technology.. But why? Chairman Rabbit, a prominent Chinese social media commentator, answers that question:
Homogeneity and coherence
Western liberal democracy and electoral politics, as a system and solution, work best under specific conditions present in their birthplace, Renaissance Europe:
Limited populations – preferably tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or a few millions at most; a limited population size shortens the “distance” between people, enables familiarity and trust among individuals.
Modest territorial size. Similarly, geographical / physical distance is tied to information exchange, lifestyle, and psychological proximity. In short, the smaller the community, the closer people are.
Highly homogenous population. By “homogeneity” we mean ethnicity/race, language, religion, shared history, value, way of life, sexuality – all the factors that tend to separate people into groups.
Organic, symbiotic Society, where there is a basic and prevailing understanding and upholding of relationship, unity, shared values, and communal life, rules, norms and a certain hierarchy and social structure (even in a democracy).
Relatively “closed” economy, there can be trade in goods with foreign countries, but limited capital and population movement; only in a relatively closed and static economy, a society can “sit down” and reconcile capital-labor relations and social distribution issues
Limited foreign/external interference and influence; minimal factors from “globalization” or international geopolitics. This ensures a liberal policy achieves relative stability in politics, economy, and society.
Shared facts (information symmetry). People consumed the same newspapers, agreed on basic facts, and conduct debated based upon shared, common understandings.
Under these (ideal) conditions, a western liberal democracy could function optimally, effectively and sustainably. There is nothing wrong with the system, just that it requires certain condition to operate and realize its merits.
And why is Europe having so much political instability now? The rise of populism, far-left/right, the trend of “illiberal democracy”? Because economic globalization, mass immigration, culture pluralism, loss of “shared facts” in the digital age
It comes down to one thing: the loss of homogeneity & coherence. The ideal conditions for liberal democracy, envisioned by those dead white European men centuries ago, are hard to sustain and no longer exist.
The system now struggles to function and deliver results, revealing the naivety of ‘end-of-history’ proponents who believe that liberal democracy and neoliberalism represents an ultimate model of governance, while failing to understand the inherent tensions between them.
Making things worse
The content below was originally paywalled.
If the socio-political factors are met, democracy can function as a stabilizer to mitigate conflicts, promote social progress, accommodate economic and technology shifts. This was the case for the post-war West but, absent those conditions, liberal democracy may actually accelerate social division & political polarization, leading to greater instability. Eg, while much attention is on economic globalization, social media, AI/automation poses a much greater threat to democracy. And one should consider what happens when big capital, advanced technology, big corporations, and politics align? What does this mean for the average citizen? A utopia? A dystopia?
Lastly, let’s turn to the US. on top of various historical coincidences contingencies, the U.S. has evolved into a vast, heterogeneous society of 360 million people, an outlier in Western civilization. When it was founded, the heterogeneity/diversity issues—e.g. Native Americans, Black people, and women—were “solved” by denying them equal voting rights with white men. But 250 years later, in today’s vastly more complex environment, these conditions no longer hold.
It is tempting to draw the unfortunate but likely true conclusion, that the United Staters of America is the least suited country for its own system. So if you see U.S. democracy facing gridlock, dysfunction, unrest, polarization, extremism, rising illiberality or even implosion–while unable to solve its political and social issues–do not be surprised. They may be insoluble, now that the preconditions for that kind of democracy no longer exist. Chairman Rabbit.
