The Debt to Our Democracy

Richard Haass, The Bill of Obligations: The Ten Habits of Good Citizens

One need only browse the headlines or crack the occasional book to know that American democracy is suffering within our lifetime. Lawmakers have jettisoned standards of legislative debate, while judges base case law on their avowed politics, not legal precedent. Meanwhile, actual voters increasingly distrust the electoral process, especially when their elected representatives tell them to. Storming the Capitol has become a political maneuver, not an act of war.

Dr. Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, is hardly the first public policy specialist to suggest Americans need a deeper investment in civics. It’s not enough to demand that the government defend our individual or collective rights, if we don’t share a commitment to the body politic. He believes Americans need social obligations concomitant with their constitutional rights. Which sounds great—if you don’t probe too deeply.

Haass divides this slim volume, barely long enough to be considered a pamphlet, into two parts. The shorter first part breaks down how America’s longstanding democratic traditions have fallen into disrepair, and we citizens bear collective responsibility. His “ripped from the headlines” exposition doesn’t really add anything that dedicated politics junkies (who are probably his core audience) don’t already know, but it lays the groundwork for his proposed solutions.

His second part involves ten “obligations,” which he defines as standards that good citizens ought to follow, without being compelled by law. Again, Haass isn’t the first to suggest that citizenship carries certain responsibilities, beyond showing up on Election Day. His proposed list of baseline standards sounds pretty good, in the abstract. Precepts like “Be Informed” and “Get Involved” match the bipartisan exhortations which emerge like clockwork every election cycle.

But the longer Haass talks, the more aware I become that his seemingly nonpartisan suggestions have a dark shadow. His fourth “obligation,” for instance, is “Remain Civil.” That sounds great, hypothetically. We’ve watched America’s political discourse descend into name-calling and bad-faith rhetoric with remarkable haste. I’d like to see politicians, and the voters who support them, resume treating the other side as ideological cohorts, not enemies to crush.

Dr. Richard Haass

Sadly, exhortations to “civility” have historically been mustered against minority groups demanding even rudimentary reforms. Defenders of the status quo have always accused Civil Rights activists, feminists, and Pride marchers of being “uncivil,” a moving target used to silence any form of dissent. Demands for “civility” usually mean forcing powerless minorities to beg, hat in hand. Protesters like Dr. King quickly learned it’s impossible to be civil enough.

Similar problems taint others of Dr. Haass’ suggestions. Suggestions to “Stay Open to Compromise” are great when talking about, say, taxes and infrastructure. But you can’t, indeed mustn’t, compromise with certain groups. I write in the immediate wake of an avowed White Supremacist shooting up an Allen, Texas, strip mall. You can’t compromise with those who believe other people need to simply die.

The laundry list continues, sadly. Haass urges us to “Value Norms,” without asking who wrote those norms or how they’ve been historically deployed. He tells us to “Support the Teaching of Civics,” even as Florida and other “red” states actively rewrite the entire discipline. Concepts like “norms” and “civics” appear morally neutral, until we make even the most rudimentary efforts to unpack their definitions in specific terms.

On civics specifically, Haass admits we need a meaningful public debate about the best civics curriculum, and I agree. But he advocates “teaching the controversy,” a technique historically used to keep moribund debates alive. Just as Intelligent Design doesn’t belong in science classrooms, because it can’t be tested, White Supremacy and Confederate “Lost Cause” apologia don’t belong in civics classrooms, because they’re inherently violent and uncivil.

These proposals sound great, provided their treatment remains superficial. I, too, would prefer a world where political actors “Reject Violence” and “Put Country First.” But we don’t, as Haass himself acknowledges. Violence, partisanship, and bigotry are all on the table. Many January 6th insurrectionists, a group Haass excoriates by name, justified invading the Capitol by claiming that, if they didn’t do it first, the other side would.

Don’t misunderstand me: I share Haass’ precept that Americans must recommit to the small-d democratic experiment. But this isn’t about atomized individuals being good people. Honestly, anybody reading Haass’ book already probably shares his commitment to America’s common good. We’re witnessing a fundamental institutional breakdown comparable to Belfast during the Troubles, and like Belfast, America needs a recommitment to law.

If most citizens being good people was sufficient, they would’ve won by now.