Author: Clarissa Ho, Casco Bay High School
📍Portland, ME

Vox Populi, Vox Dei?

Vox populi, vox dei, translated from Latin, roughly means that the voice of the people is the same as the voice of god, a common sentiment used by those expressing anti-monarchical sentiment in favor of replacing it with a democracy. Today, in democratic governments it is also used when people en masse are dissatisfied with the decisions of a politician. The common use of this phrase begs the question of whether or not this is always the case. 

In a democratic government, the members of the government are elected to represent the people and a democratic government was first introduced as a substitute for the more common, monarchical government, which often led to abuses of power by corrupt kings and a suffering working class. However, government has always had the role of leading the people and the country, which is why in a modern elected government, the government has to overcome the tension between the two roles. 

In times of crisis, it could fare well for the people if their good, elected government were to make decisions against popular opinion. “Good” in this instance refers to a government that has the best results for the people at the forefront of their minds. “Popular opinion” refers to the direct desires of the people in response to a situation. There are two types of crises: ones created in response to a sudden threat, such as a threat of terrorism or a pandemic, and crises that are more prolonged and systemic. 

Upon being faced with a sudden, major threat such as the threat of terrorism after the 9/11 attacks or the threat of unknown sickness upon contracting COVID-19, people, in general, become incredibly irrational. Think back to 2001, when Islamic extremists who were part of Al Qaeda seized four airplanes and executed suicide attacks against several targets. The country was understandably shaken at its sight and many were enraged. During this time, public opinion shifted drastically. In fact, the current president, George W. Bush saw his approval rating rise 39 percentage points in under two weeks following the attack (Gallup, 2001). In mid-September 2001, 77% of Americans were in favor of U.S. military action (PewResearch, 2021), “to retaliate against whoever is responsible for the terrorist attacks, even if that means U.S. armed forces might suffer thousands of casualties” (Motamedi, 2018). Similarly, during the COVID-19 pandemic, people obsessively hoarded toilet paper. To summarize, when faced with rage, uncertainty, fear, etc., people desire action. As documentation of human nature throughout history has shown, the emotions brought on by crises can lead to anxiety and irrational behavior. For this reason, the people’s demands during a time like this one will come from a place of anxiety and fear and will likely not be very good for the country. A government, however, does not sway with the general public and has the ability to make more rational decisions, even if those decisions are different from what the people are asking for. Additionally, in acting against their direct demands, the government is more closely following the will of the people. Generally, people want what is best for their government, which is why it is essential that the government looks past the current desires of the people and act in ways that they actually want. Similar to the way in which the people act as a check on the government, a government must act as a check on the people’s irrationality. Rather than echoing the voice of the people (vox populi) in times of crisis, the government must lead them towards a shared goal, which is likely shared because they belong to the same country and were elected, echoing their motives, but saving themselves from their own passions, which they would later, likely regret, as shown by the fact that in October of 2001, only “45% [of Americans] prioritized military action to destroy terrorist networks around the world” (Galston, 2021). with a growing number in support of domestic defense against terrorism rather than engaging in a war. Instead of being the voice of god, the voice of the people is often not even the voice of the people.

During a more prolonged crisis, one that results from a more abstract cause, such as a war or a more systemic issue, usually affecting people’s economic status, several similar ideals ring through. However, during this time, rather than desiring action, people tend to feel powerless because they feel like they have completely lost control. Shown by suicide rates during the Great Depression, from “13.9 [suicides] per 100,000 [people] to an all-time high of 17.4 per 100,000, “ (Encyclopedia.com, 2023), between 1929 and 1933, this powerlessness and prolonged despair leads to feelings of hopelessness, which result in a forsaking of one’s responsibilities, and a lack of care for the future, shown by a rise in domestic violence and child abuse (National Library of Medicine, 2017). In general, people tend to orphan their previous cares of punishment under the law and their responsibility towards their future selves and tend to steer towards lawlessness, especially since basic needs are often not being met and people do not have the capacity to. They also lack the capacity to care for those outside their family. In contrast, the government has the capacity to take everyone as well as the future into account. While everyone else has only the ability to fight for themselves, the government has a bird’s eye view of the country and will be able to make decisions that are the best for the entire country. 

It is important that the government is different from the people, and works for the entire country because it gives freedom to the people to work, protest and vote for themselves. The government being different from the people also gives the people more freedom to express their opinions openly because there is another institution which is working to ensure domestic peace and is the “biggest person”. Additionally, in terms of making intelligent decisions, the people are not the only factor, and a government that is separate from the desires of the people should take public opinion into account as one of the many factors that influence a decision.

A common counterargument of the expressed viewpoint is that not listening to the people might create chaos and perhaps lead to more crises. If a government was recklessly stubborn in disagreeing with the people, this could be true. However, in the previous paragraphs, it has been established that a government that can go against what the people want is one that will be good for the country, which implies that (a good) government is good for the people. Therefore, a government that undermines its own power in the eyes of the people is not good. The purpose of democracy, and why it is preferred by many, is to  make the people feel like they have a say in what goes on and are not being ruled. Continuing this feeling in people is less of an issue of listening to the specific actions they want to be taken, but communicating the benefits of their policies. For example, if, in response to a crisis the public wants to take one course of action while the government finds another one to be more useful, the government should be able to reach out to the people and explain how their policies will help them reach the goal they share, which they likely do because the government is elected. Despite being elected, if the government is distant from the people and doesn’t make attempts to appeal to them, people will not feel represented. Communicating with them is the key to preventing chaos.

In summary and in summation, in times of crisis, it could be could for the people if in times of crisis when it is necessary, the government and the people clash on how to ensure the best result for the country, so that in the future, we are all overcome with rage or fear or both, the government is not, and looking back, we will thank them for the decisions they made.

Sources:

“Bush Job Approval Highest in Gallup History.” Gallup. 24 Sept 2001. 5 March 2023. Gallup. <https://news.gallup.com/poll/4924/bush-job-approval-highest-gallup-history.aspx >.

Galston, William. “Twenty years later, how Americans assess the effects of the 9/11 attacks.” Brookings.edu. 9 Sept 2021. 17 March 2023. Washington University. <https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2021/09/09/twenty-years-later-how-americans-assess-the-effects-of-the-9-11-attacks/ >.

Motamedi, Setareh. “Proliferating a Culture of Fear.” Earl Babbie Research Center. 2018. 18 March 2023. Chapman University. <https://www.chapman.edu/wilkinson/research-centers/babbie-center/_files/WorkingPaperSeriesV.1.pdf >.

“Psychological Impact of the Great Depression.” Encyclopedia of the Great Depression. 22 Feb 2023. 17 March 2023. Encyclopedia.com. <https://www.encyclopedia.com/economics/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/psychological-impact-great-depression >.

Schneider, Daniel et al.. “Intimate Partner Violence in the Great Recession.” National Library of Medicine. 1 Apr 2017. 7 March 2023. National Institute of Health. <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4860387/ >.

“Two Decades Later, the Enduring Legacy of 9/11.” Pew Research Center. 2 Sept 2001. 15 March 2023. Pew Research Center. <https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/09/02/two-decades-later-the-enduring-legacy-of-9-11/ >.