In “Please Vote For Me”, democracy is introduced to children who have never encountered it before, and so we get to see it play out in an interesting way, perhaps acting as a sort of microcosm for larger, more established democracies such as the United States. By removing the patriotic connotations that many Americans associate with democracy, it allows us to see the nuances of the system that make it more flawed than it might initially appear. Moreover, those flaws are inherent to democracy, as surely if they are present in this elementary school classroom, they are present at a larger scale in our own country. For example, the parents of the students can act as large-scale donors, providing the candidates with resources to bribe their constituents. Luo Lei was able to give his classmates treats, while the religious right in Iran was able to provide the poor in rural areas with food and sustenance in order to create a positive image as a “giver”. Similar to the Islamic Republic, however, Luo Lei rules over his classroom in a less-than-democratic fashion. His Machiavellian mindset allows him to maintain steady power, with the fear that he induces in his classmates. All of these demonstrate that the straightforward voting that we associate with democracy is not actually how it ever is. Democracy as a system is inherently vulnerable in all of the ways demonstrated in this Chinese classroom, and the unfairness that we observe can all be paralleled on a larger scale.

These two rather pessimistic articles both brought up points that were scarily relevant to today’s politics. A lot of the signs of a failing democracy, such as increased illiberalism and populism, are certainly manifested in the age of Trump. Not only do polls show an increased lack of respect for democratic institutions, our president actively tries to undermine institutions such as the judiciary court for his own political purposes. There is also a rising distrust in the press, and a lack of value in the freedom of speech and the press. “Fake news” has made certain groups of people willing to compromise their rights in order to obtain what they feel is unbiased information.

However, none of this feels any more historically significant than movements of the past. Populism swept the country in both the 1890s and the 1930s. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt threatened to pack the Supreme Court in order to push his New Deal reforms. During times of poverty and danger, people have always been willing to relinquish their rights in exchange for security. This is not a new phenomenon. Foa’s point that “parliamentary procedures long reserved for extraordinary circumstances… are now used with stunning regularity” seems to me not a sign of failing democracy. Legislation is manipulated in new ways all of the time, in order to suit the desires of the incumbent Congress.

While I feel that the warning signs pointed out by both the articles are worth paying attention to, I do not think they are signs that America is doomed. This conclusion is also somewhat based on a gut feeling, knowing my own attitudes on American democracy and the attitudes of the people around me. I think that all of the trends discussed in the articles are negative and should be countered, but I do not find them to be any more alarming that historical trends of the past.

In Lerner’s parable, two characters represent the opposing forces of old and new. However, neither is portrayed particularly positively. The Chief derives his power from “some useless, mystic wisdom,” and is “the absolutely dictator.” He is described as a parochial force with ties to “traditional Turkish values.” He is seen to be outdated, a ghost. Then there is the Grocer, who is constantly seeking betterment and progress. The Grocer is described as being somehow lesser than Tosun because Tosun makes him nervous. Tosun, who traveled from the city of Ankara, is seen to be somehow superior because of his urban roots. Progress and development somehow elevate him above the grocer, who strives for this progress. Rather than admiring him for his valiant efforts to bring about change, Tosun actively dislikes the Grocer, describing him as “unimpressive.” The Grocer, even though he is aligned with Tosun in his desire at least for modernity, is seen as an undesirable wannabe. Here we see demonstrated the tensions between the old, the new, and those who seek to bring about change. Rather than extending a helping hand to the man who hopes to bring about change, Tosun sees his imitations of modernity as subpar and therefore resents him. However, Tosun also resents the Chief for being overly traditional and tied to the past. How can Tosun, who is presented as superior in this case, interact with the people of Balgat in a productive way in order to produce progress?

I agree wholeheartedly with your response. Without school, there would be astronomical negative repercussions in society. While it is easy to criticize such a large and complex institution, calling for reform is very different from dismissing the institution altogether, the way Gatto does. While the “boring” nature of school can be repressive in a way, it is also the path to social and economic mobility, a cornerstone of the American idea. Public school, at least in this era, is necessary to maintain this aspect of society.