A few years ago, University of Montana Professor Harry Fritz and I had the opportunity to team teach a class on American Culture and Politics at Nankai University in Tianjin, China. I had a previous experience at Nankai, so I wasn’t surprised that our Chinese students required no interpreter. They had completed 12 years of English training and could easily speak and understand English.
The Chinese students understanding of American democracy did not match their English skills, however. Not only had the Chinese students learned little or nothing about democracy, they had also been indoctrinated against it. That led to extensive discussions surfacing in several class periods over whether government should represent people or a political doctrine.
To the Chinese students the ideal of Chinese communism was the clear focus of the only correct governing structure. They were certain that they subscribed to the right idea, which would ultimately lead to a communist eutopia. In their view, elections should never be allowed because if the ideal of communism was the goal of government, the people should be allowed no opportunity to reject what would ultimately lead to this eutopia.
Professor Fritz and I pointed out that in our system, government got its power from the consent of those it governed. Therefore, the people needed to be free to conduct elections and to regularly monitor for themselves the details of their governance. All their other freedoms stemmed from this essential freedom to vote in elections – to consent to be governed.
This concept was largely rejected by the students because individual freedom of thought would lead to questioning, and questions will always result in differences of opinion which would divert the masses from the one true faith in communism. Professor Fritz and I believed that differences of opinions were a positive good, not something to fear. Open debate about differences of opinion could often lead to solutions to problems that would best serve all citizens.
Since the Chinese students were greatly restricted in their travel, and the Chinese government restricted access to information and to the internet, the students reflected the reality of a closed and controlled society and as a result, saw little value in independent thinking and diverse ideas.
What the Chinese students did seem to understand is the difference in the standard of living in our system and theirs. They clearly realized that Americans lived better than they did. We pointed out that economic freedom was fundamental to a generally free and prosperous society.
We were back again to the fundamental difference of whether government should be “of, by and for the PEOPLE” or whether it should be a system of dogmatic ideas, which must never be questioned.
I must note that our government “of, by and for the people” doesn’t always perform as that theory suggests. In fact, at this point in my life, in this time of Trump, American freedom faces the most direct challenge of any time in history. More’s the pity because the rot at the top is polluting our democracy to its roots. In Montana one of our grand old parties now is trying to determine what its members should properly think, and how its elected members of the legislature should vote.
In China the people can’t think for themselves, and they can’t even voluntarily become members of the Communist party. They can only be vetted by the party, and if approved, only then admitted to party membership. I think that’s not much different than what’s going on here right now.
Just as the Chinese Communist Party periodically purges its ranks to ensure uniformity of thought and loyalty to their top leaders, so too does the Republican Party purge its ranks of independent voices to ensure uniformity of thought and loyalty to top leaders. That is a level of control totally outside of the American tradition. In a representative democracy it is not the purest party that wins elections, it is the party that can attract the most votes. In a representative democracy, elections are fundamental, so that parties traditionally attempt to be broad-based enough to win elections.
Despite the warnings of some of the founders against them, political parties quickly emerged in our representative democracy even as it was being formed. All countries that are governed by their own people have political parties. But once we replace the interests of the people with the ideas of an undemocratic dogma held by uncompromising party idealogues, we will have lost what our founders died for 250 years ago.
Nationally Trump and his likes continue to try to purge the ranks of the Republican Party of all who think for themselves in representing their constituents. Here in Montana the Republican Party has attempted to purge all who think for themselves and anyone who works “across the aisle” to solve problems. But a dogmatic one-party government can’t be the government of a real representative democracy.
As we commemorate the 250th anniversary of this grand democratic republic, celebrating our right to think independently for ourselves is the real reason to celebrate America’s independence. Let us shun the shackles of party thought control as we celebrate this special Independence Day.
Bob Brown is a former Republican Montana Secretary of State and State Senate President.