There is much discussion about the future of democracy, freedom and other aspects of liberal institutions. Mainly in the United States, under the pressure of a polarised public life. But also to a lesser extent in Australia, in the face of the evasive and authoritarian behaviour of governments and the manifest priority of winning elections over addressing the existential threats of global warming and gross inequality. The conversation, of course, is also generated by the rise of China with its unashamedly totalitarian institutions and consequent capacity for decisive government action.
These factors raise the question whether ideas like freedom, democracy, public service and public accountability have the force that they once had when they inspired a costly struggle against autocracy. They also prompt reflection on why they might have lost that force and how they might regain it. In my view it is inevitable that inspiring ideas and words are hollowed out by the human failure to embody them in practice. As a result they become tainted with hypocrisy. The language then becomes uninspiring and loses its force to unify people. It needs to be renewed by costly and conspicuous manifestations of virtue.
The fate of Christian words certainly reflect this process. One of the most sacred words to describe the Christian life is charity. In its origins it embodies the response to the warm, self-sacrificing, universal and astonishing love of God for each human being. Yet its evisceration can be seen in the popular saying, ‘She (or it) is as cold as charity. The origin of this phrase lies in Jesus’ prediction of a time when people’s charity will grow cold. But in its later usage the coldness is seen to mark charity itself. It characterises people who act out of duty but without feeling. They may speak of charity as their motivation but their behaviour reveals hypocrisy or brutality.
This corruption affects especially words originally denoting a tender care for people. Places that offered protection to people in need were called asylums. The word came to represent harsh places to which people were despatched in order to protect the general populace. Similarly, places for people who were mentally ill were named after Bethlehem, the place where Jesus was born and cared for by angels. The word was shortened to bedlam, a place of disorder where devilish behaviour abounded. Mary Magdalene, the Biblical character, then considered to have been a repentant prostitute who wept over Jesus, became associated with sentimental tears and lives on in the word maudlin.
The same loss of a high and inspiring meaning and its corruption into something unattractive is more general. We may think of penitentiary, originally conceived as a place where people could turn their lives around, and now synonymous with a harsh and punitive prison. Other Christian words that have often taken on a pejorative connotation are conversion, discipline, pious, pure, correction, submission and humble.
In each of these cases values which were initially strong, positive and humanitarian were later perceived as insipid, authoritarian or even toxic. The change reflected the perception by others of the actual behaviour and attitudes of people and institutions who claimed the values embodied in the words. Penitentiaries and correction facilities became places of punishment in which forced conformity with regulation was identified with conversion. Pious became associated with immaturity, conversion with fanaticism, purity with fear of sexuality, and submission with enslavement. These associations, of course, reflected in part the prejudiced judgment by outsiders. They also reflected, however, the ways in which Christians’ actions contradicted their words. The force for good of the tradition was lost and its key words became stripped of their power to engage a community.
'It is easy to take for granted the representative framework of society, the equality and solidarity we enjoy relative to many nations, and the privilege of a relatively united nation.'
This history has implications for our current situation. When reflecting on the continuing hold of ideas like democracy, politics, patriotism, freedom and honour, we should ask first about the associations these words have come to have. Democracy is generally seen as an ideal to be praised, but in practice is identified with politics. This has a pejorative taint. It is associated with dissimulation, manipulation, back-room and sweetheart deals, remote from the national interest, public service and citizens’ daily lives. Freedom is also an ideal, but is often limited to individual freedom of choice with no entailment to the good of the society or a social bond. Patriotism is often identified with uncritical support for my country right or wrong and for national alliances and rituals.
Although these associations have not demolished the claims that the corresponding values have on society. they have weakened them by identifying them with venal, self-interested, sometimes corrupt, selfish and bombastic attitudes and behaviour. Appeal to them does not carry the urgency and purity which it had for those who fought for their embodiment in public life. As a result it is easy to take for granted the representative framework of society, the equality and solidarity we enjoy relative to many nations, and the privilege of a relatively united nation. When the words that enshrine implicit values are tainted by bad attitudes and behaviour, the result can be a cynicism and apathy which makes institutions vulnerable.
If these values are important, as they are, and their hold on society needs to be renewed, it will not be enough to repeat the words that name them, to heighten the rhetoric and to impose the symbols associated with them. That will only focus attention on the gap between the rhetoric and the tainted behaviour associated with them. It will seed further cynicism. It is better to commend such values by seeking simple words that commend them, while exposing the behaviour and attitudes that taint them and demanding coherence between rhetoric and behaviour. This reknitting of good relationships and the words that describe them is a slow and painstaking process, as the Catholics among us are finding on many fronts with our language.
It is also important to identify and celebrate actions that represent the coherence between claimed values and consequent behaviour. Politicians, church ministers and others in public life who take responsibility for behaviour inconsistent with their positions, apologise simply and without reservation, and resign their positions if appropriate, should be commended for their commitment to the values. They should not be regarded as mugs, ostracised for their sins or mocked for their failure to tough it out. Conscientious objectors and whistle blowers who call out behaviour by behaviour by representatives of government inconsistent with values should also be protected and praised, not prosecuted. They embody patriotism and democracy and purify the language that their critics taint.
Democracy is not going down the drain. But it is always at risk of being chucked into the gutter.
Andrew Hamilton is consulting editor of Eureka Street, and writer at Jesuit Social Services.
Main image: Australians Protest As Part Of 'World Wide Rally For Freedom' Against Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccines. (Darrian Traynor / Getty Images)