How to win civil rights

Some days, I just tell myself liberalism in America is dead. I have my hopes sometimes, but no sooner do I get the hint that in some far-flung corner of the United States progress is being made than I get word that conservatives are unabashedly reversing justice, innovation and progress.

In a world where unruly Republican cowboys can stampede over my beautiful garden of liberalism, there’s really nothing I can do but look at society with distress and ask, “Why?” After all, it is the public that elects these individuals, and thus the public who advances these conservative ideologies.

But while it is very easy for any politically engaged person to get frustrated with society for shaping society, there is a bright side to the political process that we often overlook. Politics may be shaped by society, but politics can also shape society. Many portray this relationship as one way, but in truth it’s a back-and-forth dichotomy. Political decisions have the power to shape people’s ideas and reframe culture.

In any political system, there is always some degree of authoritarian power; not every vote is a referendum. With this authoritarian power, individuals make decisions not based on public opinion, but personal discretion. While this power has the function of preventing some of the ills of pure democracy, such as tyranny of the majority, it also can remold and shape society.

Now dictatorships can obviously go bad, but there are practical reasons why political power not tied to public opinion is good. First, the general public is not always the pure example of good. Countless examples in history from apartheid in South Africa to Nazi Germany prove that people sometimes do not have the best interests of all people at heart.

But because politicians have some ability to exercise personal discretion when making policy, they can spot injustices and correct them. These abilities are intended to allow our political system to function better.

We have seen this play out several times in history, but perhaps most prominently with civil rights in recent American history. From the time of the Civil War to the 1960s in America, there was a majority, especially in the southern states, that did not believe African-Americans should have equal rights. The Jim Crow public that existed back then would have not promoted civil rights. It was executive authority that eventually promoted true equality.

As time passed, this policy that had to be enforced in the 1960s became the norm for society. Instead of having to enforce it, individual beliefs changed to accept these policy changes. As such, soon the public began promoting equality for all. While these politicians certainly ruffled feathers with their decision, they were attempting not just to correct an injustice, but ensure that it stayed corrected through public acceptance.

Although we may not be politicians, it is our job to contemplate politics and respond accordingly. We must determine not only whether political action benefits ourselves, but also whether it furthers the purpose of all in the community. Along those lines we must affirm or reject these political actions through getting involved in the political process — on the most basic level, with voting.

Some may fear that injustices could be committed with these authoritarian decisions. But the resistance to each of these decisions has made up the determination of injustice. For example, civil rights may have been seen as a gross injustice to the racist. But as the boom in civil rights built community and positively affirmed individuals, and the “moderate” racists stopped caring so much, the resistance against these new civil rights waned until society absorbed their purpose and made them core values.

The truth remains that injustices that directly afflict a portion of the population’s well-being will consistently be in question, whereas policy that is simply rejection will fade as positive rights are affirmed until those positive rights are absorbed by society. By expressing our empathetic opinion, we exclude tyranny and assist in the political system’s perseverance of justice. Policy is not just a potential solution to a problem, but also the potential to change the mind-set of a society.

So while conservatives may be crushing my liberal dreams, I still have hope that as executive decisions are made on such political issues as environmental problems, gay rights and labor relations, the society that disagrees with them will one day learn to accept them as a basis for policy and not a point of contention.


­— mdshowal@indiana.edu