Somewhere in my distant past, I encountered this quote. While I cannot trace back where I found it, it has made a lot of sense to me for many years. Let me explain.
In my three previous articles, I explain how the Russian people have been subjected to a certain national narrative. This narrative has allowed the Russians to dominate other ethnic groups, occupy a large empire, and be of international influence. The narrative seems to be failing.
What the Russians can Teach Us
What if You were Born in Russia?
The National Narrative
To a lesser degree, the three articles also describe the national narratives of the United States. The USA is not free of this political manipulation. And the American national narratives look like they too are failing.
I say “manipulation” because national narratives are useful tools for overly ambitious people to gain or retain political power, whether in a democracy or an oligarchy. It is almost a case that the political leaders tell the people what to believe in — and then the leaders have the will of enough of the people to support the leadership. For example, American politicians across the spectrum often shout out “Follow the Constitution” to get or retain votes.
There will always be forces trying to write a national narrative. The social engineers behind any narrative hope that the narrative sticks with enough of the people to become a collective value. But more likely, the narrative’s usefulness is more of a tool to keep a certain political elite in power, not a guide for a better society. There’s no guarantee than a narrative will be good for society.
So who should be writing the narrative?
Public Opinion should be Rightly Focused
In a later paragraph of The National Narrative, I introduced seven national narratives. Some are already in place. Others are new. Here they are:
1. We take care of the elderly.
2. We provide first-rate education for all children.
3. We support universal basic income so no one is destitute.
4. We work cooperatively with the environment.
5. We kicked the British out.
6. We subjugated the descendants of Genghis Khan.
7. We’re not American.
I think most readers will identify the last three as actual narratives: American, Russian, and Canadian, respectively. These have shaped the values of the citizens of these countries.
The first four narratives are progressive. I will say that Canada has had significant movement in these values. Yet “We’re not American” is still a stronger sentiment than the first four in terms of what it means to be Canadian. Yet how this one narrative makes Canadians a better people is a bit of a mystery. In fact, it sounds rather silly.
The first four narratives are “rightly focused.” These will all lead to a better society. We need more narratives like these four.
In order to get these narratives more mainstream, our current democracy requires citizens to first come to the conclusion that the narrative is acceptable. When enough of the people have reached this understanding, then the politicians can act to make it a true narrative.
But how do enough of the people get to that point? Especially when there are so many sources of conflicting narratives?
Is it acceptable for politicians and political parties to act only when election success could be on the line if a particular narrative is not promoted?
Example of a Bad Narrative changing to a Good Narrative
I will digress with a great example. Canada has a bad history with how it treated its First Nations people. Many decades ago, one of our Canadian narratives was to change aboriginal people into Europeans, culturally speaking. We thought we were doing the right thing. So we pulled First Nations children from their families and put them into residential schools. That would Anglicize and Christianize them!
The First Nations people were telling us these schools were not good places for their children. Slowly — very slowly — the residential schools were shut down — and children were schooled close to their parents and community.
But most Canadians, myself included, did not understand how bad those schools really were. In 2021, ground-penetrating radar was conducted on the grounds of one of those schools. It estimated the grounds hold the remains of 200 children.
That one incident is slowly writing a new national narrative in Canada. There is a new relationship evolving between First Nations and the white majority.
This new narrative sprung from outside the political process. The politicians did not lead because, up until then, votes were not on the line. But is working for votes true leadership?
Can you imagine, say in 1920, some political leaders had said: “I would not want the government to take my children away from me. Taking aboriginal children from their families is not right.”?
The 1920 politicians could not lead because many Canadians believed the residential schools were a good idea. They bought into the narrative of the great things these schools were accomplishing. So many decades of a dysfunctional social structure were inflicted on these children — only for overly ambitious white people to get votes.
Thankfully a new narrative is being written. The white majority is coming to a new and better understanding. The politicians are jumping on the wagon.
Tiered Democratic Governance
Usually, I go into lengthy diatribe of how the TDG would handle such a situation. Today I will take a different, shorter approach.
I ask my readers to spend three hours reading my TDG book. As you are reading, ask yourselves:
1. Will more positive narratives be written with TDG governance than with western democracy?
2. Will these positive narratives come in a more timely manner?
3. Will TDG representatives be more capable of leading citizens to places they are not quite ready to go?
Conclusion:
We need a system of governance that the people trust. Maybe with credible of source of where our values should go, we will be more willing to go there.
Public opinion must be rightly focused.
Published on Medium 2023
