What some may have mistaken for ornament shattering fireworks over the holidays, were two fast moving trains running along parallel tracks. One packed with courtroom drama; the other in full swing political campaign mode. Along the route, a litany of new Latin legal terms were strewn about that had not been part of the commentariat lexicon until then. Anyone paying attention got showered with a crash course of law school novelties including certiorari before judgement, per curiam, en banc, de novo, motions in limine, and a favorite from 18th century British Chief Justice Lord Mansfield:
Fiat justitia, ruat caelum [Let justice be done though the heavens fall.]
These terms were all part of the scrum of year-end developments in Supreme Court, Federal Court & State Court cases racing alongside a busy campaign season. The tracks are rife with conflict and collision courses that defy prognostication. It’s anyone’s guess as to the outcome of these two phantom train phenomena.
Along a third parallel track, authoritarianism kept chugging along. How is it that authoritarians can induce supporters to believe any fiction, any alternative fact they conjure? What is it about authoritarianism that so seduces not only those who seek power, but those upon whom power is exercised? Here are some stark reminders from the past.
These are from a newly released book “February 1933, The Winter of Literature.” The book documents the harrowing escapes from Berlin of liberal and Jewish literati except for those few who found sympathy with Hitler’s use of terms like “breeding,” “race,” and “Volk.” Hitler was already signaling his vision of an unbridled anti-Semitic master race. One rising young avant-garde star on the Berlin literary scene was seduced by the power of the Nazi rationale. For years, the Weimar Republic had been suffering social disintegration and decadence.
“If the German Volk is now turning away from this form of government, if it wants to grant itself a stricter regime again under the reign of National Socialism [the Nazi party] in order to breed itself into a sovereign race, then that is a thoroughly comprehensible, historically necessary reaction.”
Shortly thereafter, this writer signed the "vow of most faithful allegiance" to Adolf Hitler. The enumeration of freedoms lost—press, speech, association—were subordinated by those willing to “breed” a sovereign race.
On Monday, 27 February 1933, precisely four weeks after Nazi leader Adolf Hitler was sworn in as Chancellor of Germany, the German parliament (Reichstag) building burned down. Nazi leadership used the fire to claim that state enemies were planning a violent uprising. They claimed that emergency legislation was needed to prevent this. The resulting act, known as the Reichstag Fire Decree, abolished several constitutional protections paving the way for Nazi dictatorship. In hushed conversations across Berlin’s bars and cafes, Hitler’s minions were suspected of causing the fire, liberal freedoms were now gone.
In the aftermath, the Austrian philosopher, Robert Musil, noted:
“Freedom of the press, of expression of any kind, freedom of conscience, personal dignity, freedom of spirit, etc., all the liberal fundamental rights have now been set aside…without people being strongly affected at all…. One might feel most profoundly disappointed over this, but it is more correct to draw the conclusion that all the things that have been abolished here are no longer of great concern to people.”
Are they of great concern to us? They must be if we are to retain our democracy. That’s why we marvel at the invitation to Hungary’s authoritarian Prime Minister, Viktor Orbán, to address CPAC [Conservative Political Action Conference] last August in Dallas. Orbán has spent decades moving Hungary from a liberal democracy to an illiberal autocracy. In an address one week before appearing in Dallas, Orbán said that Europeans “do not want to become peoples of mixed race.” In his quest for a pure form of nationalism, he has given comfort to the rampaging “great replacement” conspiracy theory in this country. Orbán hews to a “traditional” nationalism, which translates to a full-throated condemnation of the very ideas of diversity and equality. That is because diversity and equality champion an acceptance of immigrants, LGBTQ+ rights, women’s rights, and more.
Orbán’s one-party rule, the Fidesz party, promises a return to a white, religion-based society. We have seen and heard this before. It pushes this vision by eliminating the independent press, cracking down on political opposition, and getting rid of the rule of law as have other authoritarians before him. And yet, as alienated as Hungary is from democratic countries in Europe, Orbán was here to unite forces in this country with a sympathetic Christian nationalist right.
Finally, we turn our view to another concern, Project 2025.This is a coalition of right-wing organizations and think tanks that plan to make-over, or perhaps take-over the structures of American government and democratic intuitions on day one of the next “conservative” administration. It might come in 2025 or 2029 or later, but the playbook of this group—a 1,000-page document—proposes to make our democracy virtually unrecognizable to today’s.
As characterized by Project Director, Paul Dans, “The long march of cultural Marxism through our institutions has come to pass. The federal government is a behemoth, weaponized against American citizens and conservative values, with freedom and liberty under siege as never before. The task at hand is to reverse this tide.”
It is always fascinating to see the same words, like “freedom and liberty” used in different contexts to mean very different things. Whose freedom? Whose liberty? One thing is sure. The aspirations of Project 2025 are more than policy debates, which are a bulwark of democracy. The document is rather a blueprint brought together by an army of aligned, vetted, trained, and prepared conservatives to save the country from the “predatory deviancy” of cultural elites. All it asks of us is to let this army “save the country” according to its stated terms. And the terms?
Project 2025 is built on four promises for a new age that may sound anodyne at first until each is examined carefully:
- Traditional family with a focus on Christian values [accepting hetero-normative lifestyles only]
- The end of the Administrative State [replacing career civil servants with loyal party members]
- Borders closed to global threats [preventing nonwhite, non-Christian populations from entry]
- Small non-intrusive government [employing the “genius” of free enterprise without regulation interference]
Page after page lays out a vision of this country, most of which run contrary to League of Women Voters legislative advocacy and priorities. In the months ahead, we will examine the promises of Project 2025 in greater depth.
For now, the League has 2023 to thank for shining a bright light on our priorities, which are in stark contrast to the promises of Project 2025. Our work continues to empower voters as we advocate:
- Enshrining the Equal Rights Amendment in the U.S. Constitution
- Reproductive freedom
- LGBTQ+ equality
- Common sense gun safety laws
- Climate action
- Voting rights
- Campaign finance reform
- Fully funded elections
- Fully funded public education
- Full, uncensored American history taught in our classrooms
All are part of League efforts to strengthen the guardrails of democracy.
One final legal phrase: Cui Bono? [Who benefits?]
We all do if we pull our weight to ensure the health of our voting systems and our democratic institutions. I’m betting that no one reading this month’s Sentinel is ready to relinquish the liberties and freedoms we now enjoy, nor falter in fighting for the liberties and freedoms a diverse society deserves. Those liberties and freedoms and the rights derived from them are the benefits of the 247-year-old work of our democracy.
Last month I argued that our job as League members must be to give voters reasons to vote. Surrendering liberties and freedoms does not benefit the electorate. It benefits the powerful who can crush freedoms along with dreams of a better world. We must say this. We will have to hone our skills on giving citizens reasons to vote. Virginia law* allows 17-year-old citizens who turn 18 by November 5, 2024, to register and vote not only in the upcoming general elections, but also upcoming primaries in March and June. In the current climate, we will have to double down on our messaging to convince young voters just exactly what is at stake like never before.
*[Code of Virginia. § 24.2-403. Persons under 18 years of age. Any person who is otherwise qualified and will be 18 years of age on or before the day of the next general election shall be permitted to register in advance and also vote in any intervening primary or special election.]
We have seen how the lure of mythical pasts have been able to upend formerly democratic nations. We know how persuasive trading freedom for security can be. We understand that authoritarianism is a slow, one slice at a time process. We can’t let that happen here.
Our job as the League of Women Voters is to explain why freedom and liberty matter to everyone, every day… and that the survival of democracy depends on each coming election. |