Does America need a Czar?

The Washington Post today published an article on the younger generation of Russia. Most of the youth are fans of Putin. "The Russian soul," one bright and informed young woman said, "requires a Czar."

A Czar or Emperor, like a strong, good parent, sets a fixed boundary within which all citizens must behave and even believe. Within those walls, there is protection from what a parent thinks might be threatening to the child. The child has a safe place to learn proper knowledge and behavior for the good of the family. But unlike a good parent, there is no opportunity to traverse the boundaries or breach the walls so that the child can grow up to set her own boundaries or work with others to extend the walls.

Perhaps a democracy that opens or extend the walls of behavior does endanger the soul, the life force of humans. By letting in new cultures, new lifestyles, new beliefs, confusion is created. People find it difficult to cope. Strange new practices that conflict with the prevailing morality are introduced to challenge accepted and acceptable beliefs. The security of both household and nation is threatened when the walls are torn down or have too many openings.

A benign, strong authority who can control violence is the definition of the good state especially if the authority himself stays within the walls, the rule of law, that he maintains. He oversees and approves the cultural expression in accordance with the traditional and acceptable religion. Within this stable and secure environment, people can best learn and achieve what they need to maintain their lives.

There seems to be a strong move here in the US and elsewhere to control and diminish democracy-- sometimes in the name of democracy. "Western style democracy" is considered too permissive and chaotic and leads to the wickedness of the godless. Putin loathes liberal democracy and its spread throughout the former USSR. But so do Islamic states, Christian parties railing against migrants, and Trump's American base. A strong leader makes the trains run on time.

My belief system is opposed to authoritarianism. I am a cultural libertarian advocating for free love, free press, free universities, free art. Yet I am also a socialist advocating for a market controlled under a democratic authority. But perhaps I should be prepared to transcend my belief system which is entrenched in my own secular humanism gleaned from my study of science and philosophy. My understanding of human nature and existence is rejected by those who would accept a paternal political authority, sanctified by religion or ideology, and enforced by might for the sake of security and stability. I am thereby one of those liberal elites that authoritarian populists loathe. All beliefs should be questioned including my own which expresses my own faith in the future of humanity. And democratic republican politics can tolerate libertarian cultural diversity and achieve social justice.

But I could be wrong. And I guess we should talk about it. As long as we can. Freely.