Skip to content
Subscribe

OPINION: Lincoln Was Wrong; Government Of, By, & For The People Was Always Aspirational

Published:
Democracy was always aspirational

Seven score and sixteen years ago, President Abraham Lincoln delivered one of the most memorable speeches in all of human history in his Gettysburg Address, though he wrongly presumed the world would not “long remember what we say here.”

His triumph was to clarify just what was at stake in such a devastating internal war that killed around 750,000 Americans.

“We here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain — that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.”

Just as the Framers of the Constitution had succeeded before him in elevating the vision of “a more perfect union,” Lincoln cemented an aspirational concept of American self-governance that to this day has not risen to those lofty heights.

Lincoln was wrong to imply that we have ever truly experienced government of, by, and for the people in the first place. Another hundred years went by before the Constitution was amended to extend voting rights to most citizens. Fifty more years passed before the state of Florida would extend voting rights to ex-offenders who served their time.

Even the Thirteenth Amendment, which abolished slavery, set up a dangerous exception for prison labor which remains exploited to this day. The right to vote itself should be, but isn’t, enshrined in the Constitution.

But beyond the fundamental right to vote — and to have one’s vote counted — is the right to participate in free and fair elections. In this supposedly representative democracy, or democratic republic, people submit themselves to an archaic system that is designed to subvert their participation.

As willing participants with aspirations for better government, voters provide just enough license to the system for it to persist as is, election after election, despite record dissatisfaction. Over 90 million nonvoters, who largely haven’t bought the hype, remain uncounted. But there are other groups — roughly 150 million people who think we need a third major party, and over 90 million who identify as independent — who are silenced by the system we have.

That is plainly not government of, by, and for the people. In fact, we don’t even have a two-party system, but a two-party duopoly controlled by the Democrats (roughly 70 million people) and Republicans (roughly 66 million). The two parties collude with each other to protect their grip on power. They skillfully harness the fear of lesser evil voting to fuel their multi-billion dollar enterprise that Harvard Business School professor Michael Porter and Wisconsin business leader Katherine Gehl labeled the “political industrial complex.”

Thankfully, there is an emerging movement of independent, nonpartisan, and cross-partisan reformers that is starting to rewrite the script.

The untold story of the 2018 midterms was an incredible wave of electoral reform efforts that won across the nation, from independent redistricting and the restoration of voting rights to powerful anti-corruption laws and the protection of Ranked Choice Voting. In Maine, the first-ever instant runoff for U.S. Congress yielded a flipped House seat for the Democrats. More importantly, it represented a win for the growing reform movement and a win for all the voters of Maine’s second Congressional District, who will now be represented by someone with majority support.

Just last week, the nascent political reform movement came together in Nashville, TN for the Unrig the System summit hosted by RepresentUs. One common theme in a panel discussion featuring some unlikely reform victories was the resounding message to these activists that they could not succeed and should not even bother trying. They did succeed, and we’re all better off for them having tried.

And that is the lesson we must learn now, as the United States flirts with what former-Republican and now-independent strategist Steve Schmidt calls a cold civil war. It is on all of us to try. To work together, across the political spectrum, and find our unique role in this messy project of reform and reformation.

Katie Fahey, who spearheaded the effort in Michigan to pass independent redistricting to replace political gerrymandering, spoke powerfully to the idea that everyone has a place in this critical work.

Catherine Kanter, who led a similar successful effort in Utah, hammered home the point that it’s up to local organizing, it’s up to all of us, to take it into our own hands and create the kind of change we want to see.

Desmond Meade, who led the charge for restoring voting rights for 1.6 million formerly incarcerated people in Florida, challenged all of us to put aside labels and prejudgment and instead embrace each other as fellow humans, and choose love instead of sheer power. The results of his Florida Rights Restoration Coalition campaign transcended all preconceived ideas about partisan politics in this nation.

Lincoln was wrong to advance the lie that we have a small "d" democratic government that could perish from this earth. But he was right to aspire to one.

Finally, it seems, there is reason to be hopeful.

Editor's Note: This article originally published on Medium and was republished by request and with permission from the author.

‍

Photo Credit: Everett Historical / shutterstock.com

‍

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

OPINION: Lincoln Was Wrong; Government Of, By, & For The People Was Always Aspirational

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us