Deja Vu All Over Again

Yogi Berra was right.  It is deja vu all over again.  What once has been has come around again.  Although it arrived in a slightly different package, it reanimated that which was long gone.  I am referring to our current political situation and how it recapitulates the strife of the 1960’s.

Because I am no longer young, I vividly remember the dissention roiling our country during the Johnson administration.  Agitation against the Viet Nam war, demonstrations in favor of civil rights, and campaigns for women’s liberation coalesced into a witch’s broth of anger and civil unrest.

Crowds thronged the streets shouting epithets at an unloved president. They demanded an immediate end to military actions and instant racial reforms.  If not, they threatened to burn down our cities.  The radicals—and many ordinary liberals—would accept nothing less than complete surrender.

This vehemence culminated at the Democratic national convention in Chicago. Thousands of protestors promised to shut down the event, but were held at bay by the police.  Despite a withering barrage of insults, these “pigs” enabled the nominating assembly to proceed.

Afterwards, its candidate, Hubert Humphrey, went down to an ignominious defeat.  He lost the presidential election to a Richard Nixon who had earlier been discounted as a political has-been.  The public at large was tired of a decade of incivility. People longed for more peaceful times.

But not the agitators.  They wanted a revolution.  Members of the SDS (Students for a Democratic Society) sought a socialist utopia. Meanwhile affiliates of the Black Panthers hated whites and proposed an African-American nation situated in Mississippi.  As for the feminists, they insisted on nothing less than androgyny. 

None of these folks regarded themselves as extremists.  None believed their vitriolic language or threats of violence were beyond the pale.  Their apparent animus was merely rhetoric.  This was there way of saving democracy from the deadening hand of traditional authority.

Doesn’t this sound familiar? Hasn’t a protest movement returned with a vengeance?  Isn’t our language being coarsened as a result?  Similarly, aren’t extreme proposals for social change again at center stage?  Indeed, classic socialism is back, while black separatism has been revived.

Furthermore, the current crew of activists is happy to denounce their opponents as Nazis and tyrants.  They also see nothing wrong with shouting them down in restaurants or picketing in front of their homes.  They are even prepared to shut down government programs, such as I.C.E.

What is more, some mainstream politicians defend this chaos. Like Hillary Clinton, they consider it justified.  Their hatred of Donald Trump is so great that they entertain visions of destroying our democratic traditions in the name of saving them.  As they see it, this villain cannot be allowed to govern.

And so they resist.  They resist in the streets.  They resist in the halls of congress.  They resist when friends and relatives dare support their foe.  Civil conversations are therefore gone.  Accommodations with the devil are likewise unthinkable.  All that remains is throwing one’s body into the fray and physically preventing the bad guys from prevailing.

There can be no doubt that this is a reprise of 60’s radicalism. After all, it is equally vociferous, equally socialistic, and equally self-righteous.  As importantly, it is equally crude, naïve, and mean spirited. Just because people believe they are preordained for victory does not ensure good sense or common decency.

We must remember that democracy is grounded in compromise.  It can only exist where a majority of citizens are willing to accommodate folks with whom they differ.  Otherwise they will send their adversaries to the barricades. Why?  Because people who have no hope often resort to desperate measures.

This is the reason democratic elections must be honored.  It is also why civility is essential.  If the winners are not allowed to govern or if uncongenial opinions are savagely mocked, the possibility of a redress of grievances is denied.  In other words, democracy takes self-control.  However great the temptation, intransient hostility must be eschewed.

Ironically, over the top activism tends to be its own worst enemy. We saw this in the 60’s when the silent majority threw the liberals out of office.  These voters were offended by the vitriol of the peace, civil rights, and feminist movements.  

Will this reaction also be reprised?  Will a growing contingent of Americans grow tired of radical agitation and rally around Donald Trump?  This is possible.  Liberals should thus be wary of unleashing a rejoinder that condemns them to the political wilderness.

Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D.

Professor of Sociology

Kennesaw State University