To ignore, to accept, to rationalize a consensus irregularity will only serve to further disjoint the status quo, creating the potential for a downward spiral. This week I have read this suggestion regarding our government’s reaction in two different contexts. In one the impetus was to give in to consensus behavior and in the other the concern is government's possible inclination to give in to extremist threats. Intimidation or coercion, whether by an actual majority, a vocal majority, or an egregious majority, does not make good government. (A vocal majority is a minority heard more frequently; an egregious majority is a minority heard more loudly.) We too often (and too consistently) forget that our Constitution was written to protect individual rights by avoiding the tyranny of any majority. James Madison said, “It is of great importance in a republic, not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of society against the injustice of the other part.” Be it from power or from fear, we live in a time (and perhaps it has always been so) in which a majority, and/or a minority posing as a majority, can and does tyrannize other smaller, less powerful, or quieter parts of society. In this regard, our practice of good government is merely rhetorical and our Constitution is merely theoretical; but it is good theory – something to aspire to. Having said all this, it does not lessen the import of the two aforementioned contexts in which we as individuals, as a people, as a nation should maintain vigilance and avoid rationalization, acceptance, and ignorance. If anything, these two examples should breathe life into our Constitution and ignite (or re-ignite) our passion and urgency for good government. But as long as we bend to the influence of a more powerful and/or a more scary faction, (or in some cases even a larger faction), we will be tyrannized.

Four to five-hundred. This is the number of daily COVID deaths we Americans have decided we can live with. Somehow, we have rationalized this number as acceptable, and our government has made concessions in the form of new CDC guidelines to justify this new status quo. The problem is, now that our government has agreed with us that we are tired of all things COVID it will be hard to backtrack. It will be difficult to ramp up any kind of response if things worsen only slightly from say a mere variant or simply bad behavior, thus opening the door for another new status quo of say six-hundred daily deaths; then it's just a hop to seven-hundred; then maybe a small leap to eight or nine-hundred. A downward spiral.

The second consensus irregularity of concern this week, is perhaps of more concern because a faction within our government is instigating, thus more inclined to rationalize justification for what a few years ago was considered fringe but more recently has become a scary egregious majority. Scanning headlines, I read about the threat of violence, actual violence, talk of civil war, and the convenience of withdrawing support when it works against a prescribed agenda. In this example, the same faction that has consistently supported an enforcement of laws that kills an inordinate number of blacks, is now condemning law enforcement when they are executing a legal search warrant. And because there is a vocal majority (today’s right) instigating, rationalizing, accepting and ignoring an egregious majority (the far right), more tyranny is inevitable.

In this nation, good government is charged with protecting individual rights, individual liberty; and as important, good government must protect the rights and frustrate any potential for oppression of those smaller, less powerful or quieter groups otherwise lost in the muddle. It is a difficult task. Our government today is not a particularly good government. I’m not sure if our government in any day has ever been a particularly good government. Much easier to go with the majority du jour (actual, vocal, egregious) and govern rhetorically, as all three branches so obviously do. Much more difficult to see our Constitution as a living, breathing document to be interpreted as a whole rather than our current inclination to apply an a la carte selection to rationalize and justify a specific agenda. Our government today is not a particularly good government.

I have not studied it as I should, but I suspect if I looked more carefully I would find that we as a people have been fairly consistent throughout our history regarding our application of law to err on the side of rationalization, acceptance and ignorance instead of Truth, Wisdom and Justice. That said, I would also like to believe, (I do believe), we have (to an extent) improved and perhaps on occasion we take a baby step or two in the right direction. But unless we somehow create a greater sense of urgency, I am afraid our ways will end in greater tyranny and increased violence. Will we as a people, will our government, continue to bend to power and fear? Or will we reach for compassion and justice before it’s too late?