With support from the University of Richmond

History News Network

History News Network puts current events into historical perspective. Subscribe to our newsletter for new perspectives on the ways history continues to resonate in the present. Explore our archive of thousands of original op-eds and curated stories from around the web. Join us to learn more about the past, now.

Are Americans Ready for their Neighbors to Turn Them In?

THERE’S A KNOCK at the door. Local authorities have received a tip that you’ve broken the moral code—a new set of laws banning your once-accepted lifestyle. You’re being called in for questioning, and it’s unclear when you’ll return home.

In an authoritarian state, neighborhood trust is a thing of the past. Citizens are often encouraged to report any perceived wrongdoing in their communities to the government. There are countless examples of this in history—and around the world today. It happens in Russia, and there’s even an app for it in Saudi Arabia.

In the United States, we appear to be creeping toward this culture of community surveillance. Texas’ SB 8 deputized everyday Americans to sue anyone who has had an abortion or assisted with one. Texans are reporting the parents of transgender children to authorities. Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin set up a tip line and encouraged parents to report teachers who are teaching “divisive” subjects. Florida’s “Don’t Say Gay” law encourages parents to monitor teachers. With the Republican Party increasingly embracing authoritarianism, this is likely just the start.

Tom Ginsburg, a professor of international law at the University of Chicago, says these kinds of policies are an American version of what you might see in authoritarian states.

“It incentivizes private enforcement of moral norms,” Ginsburg says. “That’s very corrosive. It’s a process that is undermining the ability of society to function in the traditional way that societies do.”

Ginsburg says he worries that we’re losing democracy in states where Republican candidates for office appear willing to subvert future elections, which means citizens’ ability to reject authoritarian leaders may be slipping away. He says he doesn’t think our conservative Supreme Court has any interest in helping prevent democratic backsliding, either.

“The Supreme Court may facilitate the undermining of democracy from below through the general stance of, ‘Well, that’s not our problem,’” Ginsburg says.

Consuelo Amat, an assistant professor of political science at John Hopkins University, says that when a state becomes authoritarian, anything people in your community learned about you during democratic years can be used against you once the new regime takes power. She’s closely studied Chile under dictator Augusto Pinochet and says that’s what happened there. Amat says those who support the new regime can essentially become informants for it.

“When that starts happening, the dynamic for communities and neighborhoods is extremely bad,” Amat says. “The distrust that people have is huge, so people start not sharing information at all. One of the cores of democracy is neighborhood trust. You need to trust others in your society and in your community for democracy to work. Period. When there’s a very high level of distrust, you will see a fracturing of community.”

Read entire article at Wired