IS THE PHILOSOPHY OF THE POLITICAL TAMMANY RELEVANT IN OUR
MODERN DEMOCRACY?
DANIEL KOFI AWUKU-ASARE,
A careful consideration of the
political philosophy that underpins the Tammany Hall in American politics from
the days of the revolution to the evolution of the democratic culture and the
reforms in the political landscape, gives a deeper understanding of a sort of
political culture that pertained, and announces much concerns, then, and even
now. For the benefit of the lay reader, let us do you the service of throwing a
bit of light on the Tammany Hall as a political philosophy, and a strong
political machine that existed functionally in the late 19th century, and early
part of the 20th century. Again, the word functionally is used advisedly in
context.
The Tammany Hall was a political
machine, and practically existed as the most dominant block of the Democratic
Party in New York, in the 1890s through 1930s. For historical purposes, it had
its headquarters in the gargantuan building of the Tammany Hall Society, a
separate form of a Secret Society that operated with all intents and purposes
in philanthropy, social relief, community services, and adherence to a unique
philosophical inclination. Ironically, most of the members of the Tammany
Society were also members of the Democratic machinery called by the same name
Tammany Hall, as enumerated above.
The party machine in the
Democratic Party in the state of New York was indeed very powerful, but our
concerns in this medium has no bearing on how powerful a block or party machine
existed, but how relevant it was to the public administration, sustenance of
democratic tenets, adherence to the modus of operandi of the entire Democratic
Party, and maintenance of the welfare of the citizenry, vis –a –vis its trend
of assumption in our current democratic culture and sustenance remains rather,
our focus.
One of the key philosophical
calling of the Tammany Hall as a Democratic machine was on the principle of
“Patronage Democracy” or the “Spoil System.” Every nook and cranny of the
bosses shared this belief and made it a calling, equally giving it a
snowballing effect in the decentralized local government system of
administration. Cronies of the Tammany Hall, believed in shared responsibility
to those who gave them the “pull” or followership.
The ideological speculation of
the nature of the machine politics did not center much on who qualified or had
the best academic qualification for the job available. The “Merit System”
actually was relegated to the background, whilst nepotism and favoritism
assumed a radical dimension in the political landscape of the geo-political and
socio-economic administration of the New York City and for that matter the
State. Off course, the City was figuratively the State and Tammany Hall
invariably; the Democratic branch in the State of New York, even though other
seemingly blocks of the Democratic Party machine existed in the State.
The geo-political philosophy of
the Tammany Hall vehemently resisted Public Service Reforms, which pertained in
education, employment and allocation of social services and infrastructure. The
multi-dollar question is why the vehement opposition and resentment from the
“Bosses” of the Wards and from the District and Municipal administrative hierarchy?
Do you believe in the moral value of the principle of “Honest Graft?” Do the
citizenry need to share in the joy of the Honest Graft? Were the citizenry,
really conscious of the principle of the “Honest Graft” in that political and
democratic evolution? Was dictatorship shrouded in obscurity and enforced in
the will of the people?
These were the revelations that
brought enlightenment in the face of the culture of comfort that the social
class or the bourgeoisie carved for themselves in the party political machine
of the 20th century. And today we ask: How relevant is this political
philosophy to our cherished democracy? Is the party political machine still in
operation? If yes, of what trend is it different from the 20th century
historical demonstration of the Tammany Hall?
A critical development, worthy of
note, was how the urban political administration, influenced and hijacked supposed democratic elections, through a
mechanism called repeated voters or simply “repeaters”, just to ensure that the
Tammany Hall secure power for the Democratic Party and continue to “build the
nation”, as purported. To them, Civil Service Reforms was a curse, and amassing
wealth through a political office was just an opportune blessing of Mother
Nature, and just like the discovery of hidden treasury.
It is significant to indicate
that as we recall this significant political milestone, a critical
introspection and retrospection is made of the current dispensation of the
geo-political and democratic governance. Has the party machine improved or
deteriorated overnight? If the purpose of politics is to seek the common good
of the citizenry, then must the citizenry bear the blunt of a unique
inclination to a political philosophy by the core of the groupings?
What is perhaps required in the
reform administration of the current dispensation of politics and government,
is social and economic justice, which is interwoven with equality, equity,
preservation of human dignity, good governance, accountability, rule of law and
respect for the constitution. These reforms do not only improve our governance
system, but equally, they help sustain the very moral fabric of our
socio-cultural norms, values, love for humanity and fear of God.
Again, in the current dispensation of the reform administration,
bribery and corruption is a crime prosecutable under the law, and in the
circumstance, the giver and the receiver are both at fault. In fact, the power
of the instrument of the law was perhaps, inefficacious or unmindful under the
regime of the political machine - Tammany Hall, as crime was compensated, at
the expense of justice administration and correction. So we ask: Has the law
resumed its efficacy since? Or the law is still an ass? At what point in time
do we feel convinced that the fundamental human rights of the citizenry is
marginalized under the full glare of the instrument of the law, and do we still
have such machines that guarantee the barbaric continuity of this system? To
this extent, we seek to clarify, how relevant the political philosophy of the
Tammany Hall is to our modern democratic culture, and to make a full assessment
of their ramifications on the wellbeing of the citizenry.
Are there any useful lessons for
the political hierarchy and the citizenry? As published in his book: “The shame
of the cities,” Lincoln Steffens, also a former city editor of the New York
Commercial Advertiser, remarked, “Tammany kindness was real kindness and went
far” its power “gathered up cheaply like garbage in the districts.”
We cannot assume to take anything
for granted. As patriotic citizens, our active participation in the democratic
process of decision making is as equally important as the power and role
invested in our representatives in government, and we have a collaborative role
to ensure the sustenance of true democratic governance, devoid of undue
manipulations. To partner this contract effectively, we must do away with
apathy and indifference in the governance of the country. Our political
representatives, who are entrusted with enumerated powers, must also ensure
that our civic responsibilities are honored through effective and efficient
civic leadership engagements, and citizenship active participation in the
democratic governance in a welcoming manner of our inclusive democratic political
culture.
A critical observation of the
Tammany machine, may conclude that perhaps, active participation in the local
politics and strategic tactics of the Tammany machinery was not absent, what
really was missing, was a lack of understanding of the socio-political issues,
by a mass majority of the electorate, and this disadvantaged them immensely to
the benefit of the political lords. The call again is for our modern
democratic institutions and civil society activist groups to intensify their
public education campaigns, on all the socio- economic, political and legal
issues that bind and concern the citizens, in order that they might be well-
informed to contribute their quota meaningfully, and become watchdogs on the
main principles of Checks and Balances inherent in the very concept of
Separation of Powers.
This is what Aristotle describes in the real sense of the
word, “Citizenship.”
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?
story_fbid=10202837189120543&id=1525867385
https://www.linkedin.com/in/daniel-awuku-asare-264572190
awukuasaredaniel@gmail.com
Please kindly send me your objective comments and critique on this piece, and let's brainstorm, and share the post in our networks. Thank you as usual.
ReplyDelete