A Shaky Democracy

While you are reading this, I will be in either Ranomafana or Morondava where my fellow Fulbrighters and I have decided to vacation over Holy Week and Easter. Thankfully my Malagasy is now good enough to ask, “Aiza ny fianagonana kathôlika?” and, “Amin’ny firy mivavaha?” Where is the Catholic Church and what time is the prayer, respectively.

Nonetheless, I still wanted to provide you with something to read while I’m off collecting more material for the next several blog posts. Indeed, I fully expect there to be plenty to write about while I am in the jungle of Ranomafana and along the coastline in Morondava. That being said, I had dinner with some Malagasy friends a few weeks ago where we had a conversation that I found profoundly interesting and, if I am to be honest, would shock many of my American friends. Democracy, especially the type of representative-republican democracy promoted by the United States and a type of national-republicanism promoted by France and similar European countries, simply does not carry the rhetorical weight we Americans and other Westerners believe it does in the rest of the world, and most certainly not in places that have experienced what happens when the American-style democracy goes wrong. Let me explain what I mean.

We always debate in the economic development world about which comes first, political liberty or economic freedom. This isn’t a trick question with a cheeky answer, “haha! They arise simultaneously and you cannot have one without the other.” In fact, it’s a pretty proven point that historically in order for political liberty to be successful, there are several prerequisites that do not necessarily involve a democratically elected government. These are mainly an educated and moral population, the infrastructure to provide necessities (e.g. self-sustaining agriculture) and to mediate the flow of good and services, a respect for the Rule of Law, and a integral and transparent governing body. Believe it or not, these are harder to come by than one may think. Moreover, every country has had these things before transitioning from any form of government to a democratically elected government. This includes economic miracles like South Korea, which had a dictatorship before and after the Korean War but allowed economic freedom and promoted education and technology. Only when South Korea was a prosperous and education nation did it transition to the democracy we know it as today. Mind you, this is the background knowledge I have going into this conversation with my friend.

“You know,” he said, “I kind of prefer dictatorship over democracy.”

“Really?” I remarked. “What do you mean by that?”

“Well, you see,” he continued looking a little embarrassed, “the Malagasy people, they just don’t get it. When they hear liberty, they think it means ‘do whatever you want’ instead of a responsibility. It’s like a view of anarchy. They aren’t educated.”

“The government is promoting education and has made countless reforms in the past decade. Is it not working?” I poked.

He laughed a little before answering my questions. “Oh, it will never work. The government promotes and reforms education, although they don’t provide the resources. But the people, they don’t trust the government, so they don’t get the education. People here in Tana are easily tricked. The candidate gives them a t-shirt or a bowl of rice, and they vote for them. They think all the politicians are the same and no one believes in their promises. They say something wise, and people nod and vote yes for them. And moreover, our culture is incompatible with democracy.”

My eyebrows raised a little bit, but only metaphorically, because I know where he is about to go. “What do you mean by that?”

“Well, you see, Malagasy culture has a great respect for one’s elders.”

“From the tradition of fady and the worship of the ancestors who provide guidance?” I asked.

“Exactly,” he confirmed. “Out in the countryside, you listen to the elders. They are always right. It doesn’t work that way in a real democracy where you have to think for yourself and think about the candidates and policies and how they affect people. The culture completely conflicts with the idea of how democracy is supposed to work. So we have tried to make the people do the democracy when the culture is against the nature of democracy. It doesn’t work for us. We are a very passive people.”

“And how would a dictator solve that?”

“Well, everything is so slow in a democracy. Nothing gets done because there is too much argument and too many ideas. Everyone wants power and money, so they never do the things than really need to be done. But if we have a good dictator who can do what he needs to do, he can fix the infrastructure, make people respect the law, get rid of the corruption, and make people trust the government again. Then when we are educated and have the prosperity, first with agriculture to feed us, then industry to make things, and then technologies with the services, that is when we can transition to democracy. We aren’t ready now, and that is hurting the people a lot. A dictator could get the job done.”

“That dictator will have to be as holy as Jesus Christ!” I joked, to which we chuckled. “But I see what you mean,” I said. “What I hear you saying is that you understand that political liberty requires more than just the right to vote. In fact, it requires a whole lot of groundwork and foundation to support it. Otherwise, it all falls apart and becomes a dictatorship in disguise without anyone to do anything about it.”

“That is exactly it,” he said. “I don’t like the idea of a dictator forever, but one for about 20 years to make that, what did you call it? foundation for democracy, would be the most ideal situation for Madagascar, I think. I know it is nearly impossible. But I also think it would be better than what we have now because it is not working and people are hurting themselves and are uneducated. There is a lot of poverty, but the government is promoting the wrong things. They aren’t fixing the real problems, the real problems that they can fix like infrastructure and agriculture.”

I’ve had this kind of conversation plenty of times before. The issue I have with a dictatorship is the same issue I have with a democracy; corruption. Corruption is always a problem in any form of government. Unfortunately, there’s no true or painless way of dealing with it, and the issue of corruption remains the most unsolved mystery in political science and economics. I mostly subscribe this to the fact that it’s a moral rather than political and economic dilemma. Nonetheless, the fact remains, what my friend is looking for in his dictator is a strong, moral, and integral figure who is willing to push forward an agenda that forgoes his own self-interests and places the needs of his people at the forefront of all he does, even if this means that he will not reap the benefits of his actions or be slandered by those who want power for themselves.

I won’t validate or dismiss these ideas I’ve shared. That’s for you to decide their legitimacy. But I will ask you to reconsider any view you may have about the United States “exporting” the Star-Spangled-awesomeness of democracy, especially against another people’s will. And for those of you who preach “diversity of culture”, understand that that means other cultures will not always accept your progressive ideas nor will they be welcoming to any condescension that comes with it. Some people are satisfied with their dictator and their “backwards ways”, as weird as that sounds.

What does Catholic Social Teaching instruct us to do? From my point of view, we’re meant to promote, through solidarity, those things that form the foundation for a functioning democracy while simultaneously bolstering our own democratic culture by forming strong communities that abide by one another and promote those principles necessary to be free, virtuous, and flourishing persons.

“What does that even mean, Nathaniel?”

In short, it means striving to live a virtuous life in everything we do and to cling most tightly to the message of the gospel of loving others. It’s a cheesy answer, I know. But trying to put it in practice is much harder than we would think when we consider all the temptations we face daily. Nonetheless, living virtuous lives and supporting those politicians with integrity is the first step in combating corruption, which, as I have argued, is a moral issue that cannot be solved with any amount of political, economic, or military pressure. It reminds me of a paper I wrote once in college about the temptation of Jesus in the desert where Satan presents before Him all the kingdoms of the world if only He would bow down and worship him. Christ rejected the ways of the world and accepted the way of God, of love and sacrifice. The result was not an earthly kingdom, but it was the start of setting the world free from the chains of sin, of which corruption is included. So when we think about democracy, dictatorship, and all the jazz that plays along with those loaded words, maybe we should take a step back, understand the full context of the situation, and maybe try to see where the ways of men have failed and where the way of God will ultimately prevail. It’s not a satisfactory answer. Nevertheless, I didn’t promise you one.

I hope you have a wonderful Easter and Holy Week. I encourage you to dive into the mysteries of the season and embrace the message that Christ is risen and has conquered death. As always, know that you are in my prayers each morning. All I ask is that you do the same for me.

May God be praised.