The attack on democracy in the US has brought a peculiar celebration of force, brutality and emotional commitment at the cost of critical thinking and normal human empathy. These traits show up in swingeing cuts to the public service and scientific research.
The US economy has maintained global hegemony for the past 50 years largely by dominating technological advances, with largely effective policies and regulatory frameworks. Now, the institutions that delivered these successes face a crippling assault from an administration that yet claims to measure its own success primarily by US economic power.
At an ideological level the paradox makes sense. Rationalism arose precisely to counter arbitrary rulers. Capricious authoritarianism cannot easily coexist with evidence-based discourse. That reality helps explain the current US administration’s hostility to the institutions designed to promote rationalism, such as universities and non-partisan science agencies.
At an ideological level the paradox makes sense. Rationalism arose precisely to counter arbitrary rulers. Capricious authoritarianism cannot easily coexist with evidence-based discourse.
Ultimately though, modern societies cannot survive without institutions capable of analysing reality as the basis for effective actions. Complex economies and social services are hard to understand and manage. We need quality statistics and research. The ideal aim is to determine what proposals will work in advance, but even more important is to monitor progress and propose course corrections when required.
Given these realities, the response to the current attacks on the scientific establishment in the US has been astonishingly muted. In part, that results from the failure of technocratic responses to seriously address voters’ concerns.
Policy analysts inside and outside the state often see their core function as blocking politicians’ wilder ideas, rather than seeking better ways to meet their constituencies’ needs. However, if the status quo isn’t delivering for the majority, stopping radical or corrupt change won’t ensure stability in the long run.
Lessons for South Africa
As the world’s most unequal democracy, South Africa has much to learn from the tragedy unfolding in the US. Above all, most voters need economic opportunities. Yet officials and policy analysts have viewed most efforts at large-scale structural change as too risky and disruptive. But if excessive risk aversion prevents tangible progress for the majority, we open the door to the fantasies peddled by populists.
It doesn’t help that the people who develop and analyse policy live in a different world from the majority in terms of their incomes, lifestyle and accountability, as well as the propensity to communicate through statistics and jargon. They often remain enamoured with dogmas that developed in countries with different circumstances from South Africa.
Honest, professional public servants and the policy researchers who support them have undoubtedly provided inimitable support for South Africa’s relative stability since 1994. But for all the benefits, their policies have not focused enough on meeting most voters’ expectations.
But without more rapid progress towards an equitable and inclusive society, South Africa risks the kind of anti-democratic populism now surging in the US.
The US shows where this path can end up. We need to be better at taking on risks and managing them, instead of letting the risk of failure deter us from more ambitious policies.
The solution isn’t to perfect more long-run plans. Rather, we need to set unambiguous national priorities, monitor progress towards them and course correct if required to achieve them. The resulting policies will be disruptive and possibly second-best from the standpoint of established theory. But without more rapid progress towards an equitable and inclusive society, South Africa risks the kind of anti-democratic populism now surging in the US.
More broadly, the US experience underscores the reality that democracy is about far more than elections. It needs a network of diverse institutions to control sources of power outside elections, above all through collective action but also through reporting on the powerful, and analysis of policy options and impacts.
Vital institutions include the unions and community networks, the media and research agencies, as well as the independent public service and the judiciary. If these organisations fail, democracy as a whole cannot stand.
• Makgetla is a senior researcher with Trade & Industrial Policy Strategies.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.