getting to solutions

Given the life-and-death seriousness of certain challenges we face, like figuring out what to do about climate change, our only chance is to foster a political culture that is more rather than less intelligent than the sum of its parts. Solutions need to be arrived at democratically because unless there is sufficient buy-in on the part of a committed citizenry, there is little hope of success. It might be hard to imagine being able to crawl out of the deep dark hole our political process has descended into; however, there are some grounds for optimism. Humanity has successfully faced more difficult challenges. Solving our particular governance problems is a small step compared to many other moments in history when humanity has risen to a challenge. The stakes might be higher for us, but redeeming a political process that has been eroded corruption, polarization, apathy, and cynicism is a less radical undertaking than, for example, replacing royal rule with our existing governance model.

Doing what we need to do to set ourselves up for success is within reach; nonetheless, there is a difference between optimism and having a guarantee of success. While having the benefit of hindsight makes it seem like positive social change becomes inevitable after a fully formed “idea whose time has come” emerges, and while the prospect of being “on the right side of history” sounds comforting, the actual experience of those who have been on the right side of history tells a different story. In a superficial version of history, what we have come to take for granted seems as though it was meant to be, but a deeper understanding recognizes that the real-time experience involved a lot of uncertainty, hardship, and even danger. The innovators whom history has since come to view as heroes were often murderously vilified in their own time. Typically, an idea whose time has come doesn’t feel particularly certain when it first emerges.

We forget that the emergence of the very idea of democracy as we know it developed slowly over the course of a number of centuries prior the founding of the fledgling and uncertain governance model that would become the United States. We gloss over how precarious, how alien, what a departure from royal rule democracy was, and how much resistance had to be overcome. We overlook what a leap of faith it was to take a chance on the shaky hope that the radical experiment would not turn into “a war of all against all” as Thomas Hobbes had predicted.

Before new ideas are accepted into the mainstream, they are first introduced by brave pioneers and then, sometimes eagerly, sometimes only obligingly, vetted by early adopters. Most people sit on the sidelines, duly skeptical but watching for signs that the idea might catch on, cautiously waiting to see how events unfold. If the idea gets some legs and gains some momentum, fair weather friends come out of the woodwork, and then what had previously seemed radical becomes the new normal. While this narrative may not be entirely encouraging for those who are on the front line, it at least offers some solace through the recognition that if we encounter hostility, we are in good company.