Article by Mona Charen in "Townhall":
In July 2018, Commentary published an article by Yuval Levin that
caused everyone who thinks about the balance of power among the branches
in Washington, D.C., to say: "Of course! That's it exactly!" It had
long been observed that Congress had, over the course of several
decades, relinquished its powers to the executive and the courts. That
wasn't news. Others had remarked that geographic sorting and
gerrymandering had increased the ideological polarization of the two
parties. This spurs members of Congress to side with presidents of their
own party more than with their fellow legislators.
Levin's
insight went further. The piece was titled "Congress is Weak Because
Its Members Want It to be Weak." During Obama's presidency, Democratic
members of Congress called upon the president to change immigration law
by executive decree. The Republicans had majorities in both bodies in
2018 and a president who was willing to sign nearly anything, yet the
Congress passed only tax reform and then elected to sit idle "waiting to
see what the president will say next." Even worse, despite unified
control, the Congress came close to a government shutdown, and neither
body even considered a budget resolution -- the key legislative
responsibility. "Congress," Levin wrote, "is broken."
How was that
possible? Aren't politicians as ambitious as the Founders expected?
They are, Levin argued, but their ambitions have been poured into
different vessels. The story of Congress's decline is also found in
other institutions of American life -- the family, universities,
churches and more, as Levin elaborates in a new book, "A Time to Build."
In the case of Congress, he argues, the weakness arises from
members choosing to treat the institution not as a durable form for
collective action, but rather as a platform from which to burnish one's
celebrity. Thus do we find members of Congress eschewing their
fundamental duties as legislators to grandstand on cable TV or social
media. When members are mere performers, Congress becomes only a
proscenium and this, in turn, robs the institution of legitimacy and
respect. Elected members frequently seek followers by heaping scorn on
the institution they represent, with demoralizing effects. Whereas 42%
of Americans had confidence in Congress in the 1970s, only 11% said as
much in 2018.
"A Time to Build" diagnoses the decline of
institutions as the source of many social ills, including loneliness and
despair, which have been attributed to other causes. Levin is
unconvinced that economic stagnation explains the anomie that
characterizes our time. The financial crisis was traumatic, and
doubtless had far-reaching effects, but the expansion that followed has
now been underway for 12 years. Unemployment and interest rates are low.
Wages are rising, especially for the unskilled. Yet the economic good
times have not been accompanied by any diminution in malaise and
division.
Institutions, Levin acknowledges, can be oppressive. Any
good can be abused. But at their best, institutions serve as molds of
character. They help to give life meaning by assigning us roles to play. To accomplish their worthy goals -- educating the young, settling
disputes, disseminating the news and so forth -- they must teach
self-control and enforce standards. By their nature, their purposes are
larger than the individuals who comprise them. Those aims are undermined
when members neglect loyalty to the institution and its standards in
favor of personal display. "The discipline and reticence so essential to
leadership, professionalism, responsibility, decency, and maturity,"
Levin writes, "are forcefully discouraged by the incentives of the
online world." Ours is a selfie culture of "personalized
micro-celebrity, in which we each act as our own paparazzi, relentlessly
trading in our own privacy for attention and affirmation and turning
every moment into a show."
Institutions channel our ambitions in more productive ways. Though
many American institutions remain strong, Levin finds it significant
that the one institution that has not seen a decline in trust over the
past several decades is the military. Perhaps that's because the
military is the most unapologetic "molder" of character in American
life. "If you hear that someone attended Harvard," Levin offered at an
American Enterprise Institute forum, "you may conclude that he or she is
smart. But if you hear that they attended the Naval Academy, you'll
probably conclude that this is a serious person."
Other institutions, from media companies to churches, could
benefit from greater discipline about their core responsibilities and
greater loyalty from their members. More of us should ask: "What should I
do here, given my role or position?" Tom Wolfe labeled the 1970s the
"Me Decade." Yuval Levin is arguing for an anti-me future. If more of us
put a cork in our narcissism, pour ourselves into institutions and
uphold their standards, our national discontent might be much
diminished.
https://townhall.com/columnists/monacharen/2020/01/23/a-time-to-build-n2559964
Post a Comment