by Mark L Kornbluh

Review by Matthew Kordon, candidate for NC House 2024, District 11

Like many candidates before me, I recently wondered why it is that city-dwellers tend to vote Left, suburbanites are a mixture, rural people tend to vote Right, and poor people rarely vote. From hearing this, a friend recommended to me this book by Mark Kornbluh and from reading it, I did not get an answer to my questions but I discovered two better, deeper questions: What caused American to stop voting for the whole of the 20th century? And why did America willingly, partially abandon such a successful and beautiful experiment in liberty to halfway return to a strange mishmash of tyranny, elitism, and tribalism in the form of a big, technocratic government? These are thoughtful and bleak questions with implications for liberty lovers, today. Despite that, I was not taught very much about this in history or civics when I grew up, yet this big-picture transformation that America underwent had colossal ramifications!

In the author’s day, Presidential elections drew out just 51 to 58 percent of the eligible electorate to the voting booth. But as a historian, he knew that participation had not always been pathetic. There was once a time when voter participation was beloved and encouraged at levels not-since seen. The author turns his focus on the era of time from about 1880 to 1920, a tale of two eras: it was the best of time at first and then the worst of times afterward. In the author’s opinion, one needed to go back that far to understand voting patterns at the end of the 20th century. Mr. Kornbluh focuses more on academic data rather than on giving his opinions and the book is better for it. He allows the audience to draw their own conclusions but openly acknowledges what a shame it is that events happened the way they did and produced such abyssal voter participation in his day and before.

In the 1880s, one little girl with the help of her Mother, neither of whom with the right to vote, had —dare I say— more influence over politics than did any vote cast by a voter alive 50 years later! This bottom-up activism of the Gilded Age must have been a sight to behold in its efficiency and simplicity. In those days, Mr. Kornbluh insists, everyone know a representative from their preferred political party, a person who listened, gave out information, and helped you to vote on election day… even teach English if necessary! The upside to the dreaded machine politics was that, well, political parties were as efficient as well-oiled machines to the benefit of the voters. Most everyone was well informed, cooperative, and eager to vote, even nationalized immigrants. There was a real feeling that the locals held the power and that voices could be heard. After all, there hardly existed a year-round national committee for any political party and one was formed every two years as needed only to be disbanded again. As much as 90% of the voters not only voted for President but took the time to vote down-ballot too. The day after election day, communities got together to shut fireworks, serve barbecue, chat, sing songs, and fly the flag. Election day was once a uniting and hopeful time.

A small part of me wishes the book, and history itself, ended right there, but it continues: During the Gilded Age, politics was a primary form of entertainment and community engagement. By the 1910s, new entertainment options like sports, opera, and circuses distracted Americans from political expression. Thus, political donations dwindled, and parties couldn’t afford to engage voters. A new generation grew up without political involvement in sharp contrast to their parents, often unaware of election days and without enthusiasm.

The following was not in the book but is needed context: From the beginning, America always sought new reforms, believing constant change was necessary. This mindset peaked during the Civil War, leading to the extreme measures of occupation, property destruction, killings, and the suppression of rights. Post-Reconstruction, Americans continued pushing for reforms, from ballot laws, to popular election of Senators, to women voting, to work hours, to banning alcohol, to currency changes, to recreating an income tax, to new State admissions. This shift centralized power in the Presidency and Senate, away from other officials. The Civil War era was nostalgically viewed as a time when drastic actions were justified to enforce federal power, a belief reinforced by Gilded Age Republican Presidents.

In the various parts of the country, the concept of progress shifted from improving liberty to catering to mobs with often-selfish, regional demands as America grew in population and quantity of states. Different regions had conflicting desires, yet could only agree on increased social spending or fewer civil liberties. The Progressive Age, ironically, brought about many negative changes like Jim Crow laws, Socialism-inspired policy, and significantly increased taxation, contrasting with the moderate and prosperous Gilded Age. Imperialism also rose, with the U.S. occupying and swallowing territories. Who had time for voting in all of that mess?

The author states this would have been difficult to avoid and very lamentable, and I agree. America’s prosperity ironically helped pave the way for its own illiberal, big-government form in which no one is watching over the politicians who have delegated most of their responsibility to the unelected technocrats in our agencies. But it is worth noting that we are Libertarians not for prosperity but for Liberty itself. Prosperity is merely the fruit of the goodness of our philosophy and should neither be expected as a constant nor pursued as the greater goal. A never-ending population increase is not the goal of liberty, and we would be wise to remember that in a time when a vote has little worth and citizens are panicking over declining birth rates.

America has partially returned to its old ways of caring, becoming informed, and voting en masse. That good news was caused by our prosperity, specifically the growth of the internet, and it shows that if Libertarians are patient, we will see liberty overcome most any obstacle. Nevertheless, the book is right to warn us that our country has dramatically changed over the years and those changes will surely weigh around our necks like blessings and curses; the return of voter participation might be simply coincidence; the gradual changes of our country might have brought us here for ominous reasons such as Presidents being the most powerful they have ever been.