Managers of Democracy

If you looked at some headlines recently, you might have noticed a new political crisis brewing in the United States. On May 22 the Mayor of New York City declared a state of emergency, and the military is also being deployed to abate the problem. If you don't know, there is a baby formula shortage. Republicans have been floating around the airwaves, moaning about the incompetence of the Biden administration, denouncing their Democratic colleagues' failure to save and feed American babies. A good campaign ad, I'm sure. Worth noting, however, is that the loudest conservative voices execrating Joe Biden on Fox News and Twitter voted against legislation addressing this issue. Matt Gaetz, Paul Gosar, Louie Gohmert, Lauren Boebert, and Marjorie Taylor Greene were among the "no" votes on the "Access to Baby Formula Act." The bill would make more formula available for WIC (the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children), a government program helping low-income working-class families. Naturally, that would be "crowding out many hard-working American families," as Matt Gaetz tweeted. Andy Biggs, a Republican representative from Arizona, said he didn't support the bill because bolstering the WIC program would be "artificial," I don't know where Mr. Biggs expects to find a supply-chain- solutions-tree, or a naturally occurring barge carrying baby formula, but I'll assume he knows what he means by the words he uses. As is often the case with a national brouhaha, valuable lessons lie beneath the media sensation. This story gives us a chance to talk about leadership.  Obviously, the reason for Republican uneagerness to solve this problem is not a mysterious one, it's the same reason Nixon thwarted the Paris Peace Accords in 1968 to prolong the Vietnam War: it's difficult to run on a campaign of change and improvement if matters are already improved. Nixon couldn't run against the war without the war, just as House Republicans can't run against Democrats if they fix peoples' troublous conditions. (Of course, they could run on good ideas, but that would require first a unique thought.) But the political poker game notwithstanding, the verbiage used by politicians and pundits, about the need for the Biden administration to address this pressing matter—that reflects so poorly on the White House—shows how far we have sunk into servility. There are three branches of government, not one. The idea of a population governing itself seems to be going out of fashion; given that we look towards a leader whenever we're unsure of what to do. But the two other branches, the state and local governments, have power too. The founders didn't want everyone looking toward one kingpin. There seems to be a misunderstanding of leadership. In a small enough group or operation, there can emerge a helmsman, who steers and guides the group forwards. That concept falls apart on a bigger scale, however. The way I see it, on a bigger scale there are two kinds of leaders; one is the unalloyed captain that the crew must follow wherever he decides to go—like, Putin, Xi Jinping, or Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov (bonus points if you know which country he leads). The second, and more desirable, is someone like Martin Luther King Jr: a spokesperson. As admirable as Dr. King was, he would have been the first to tell you he didn't create the civil rights movement, leaders like him can emerge only from the unflagging efforts of those before them. The President of The United States or European prime ministers are in my view a combination of the two, calling them leaders would be giving too much credit. Managers... perhaps "managers of democracies" would fit them better. Anyway, it's something to think about. To close, I'll leave you with a quote from Noam Chomsky: "[You're] not going to get a leader who'll save you unless you do the work, then, you can get spokespersons."