On July 4, 1776, the United States was born not just as a nation, but as an idea. It was the first country truly born of liberalism: a political philosophy rooted in individual rights, limited government, and the rule of law. Today, it is often said that America faces a “democracy crisis,” yet our electoral institutions, for now, remain uncorrupted. Indeed, the vast majority of eligible Americans have access to the ballot box. What the country is truly encountering is a liberalism crisis.
Liberalism, properly understood, is not a partisan label or a synonym for any particular party platform. It is the political framework that emerged from the Enlightenment in the 18th century and is based on the premise that people are born with natural rights — rights that the government does not grant and therefore cannot take away. Instead, the government exists to protect these rights, even against the will of a democratic majority. It demands institutional checks on power to maximize the freedom of individuals. Because, as our founders knew, individual rights are too easily destroyed “by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.”
Democracy in the United States was built, over time, on top of a base of liberalism famously enshrined in the Declaration of Independence: “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Even as suffrage expanded and democracy widened, the rule of law, separation of powers, and constitutional limits remained to protect individuals from government excesses.
That distinction matters now more than ever.
Today, there is, rightly, widespread concern about the health of American democracy. An increasing number of politicians reject the results of fair elections when they lose. At the same time, a troubling share of our elections are effectively decided in low-turnout contests. Election officials face an onslaught of conspiracy theories and misinformation, and many of the January 6 rioters, who sought to overturn a lawful election through violence, faced limited consequences.
But the more pressing threat we face stems not from too little democracy, but from a growing contempt for liberal constraints. President Donald Trump and many of his supporters now claim that his supposed “unprecedented and powerful mandate” justifies any course of action, even if it disregards the courts, the law, or the Constitution. “What is the point of having democratic elections if unelected activist ‘judges’ can override the clear will of the people?” asked the president’s former adviser and former friend, Elon Musk. When the Court of International Trade ruled that Trump had exceeded his authority on tariffs, he responded with a post claiming he was on a “mission from God” and nothing could stop him.
The President of the United States does not draw power from a divine mandate like a monarch. His authority comes from the Constitution. From habeas corpus to free speech to federalism, our system of government has been designed to constrain the arbitrary nature of government power, even if the government’s actions are popular with a large segment of the population. Republican defenders of the president’s illiberal overreach have become fans of Barack Obama’s quote, “elections have consequences.” They do, but they also have limits, and that is the foundation of the American experiment.
TRUMP THREATENS TO SUE NEW YORK TIMES AND CNN OVER IRAN STRIKE COVERAGE
To be sure, illiberalism is not unique to the Right. Many on the Left now increasingly feel that respect for liberal institutions is a sucker’s game, an outdated constraint that only hampers their side. However, once both parties agree that checks on power are for losers, democracy ceases to be a means of progress and instead becomes a weapon to be wielded against one’s enemies.
As we celebrate the Fourth of July, we should remember what made the American Revolution unique: It wasn’t just a break from monarchy, it was a commitment to “unalienable” rights and the constitutional form of government that could protect them, even against democracy.
Jonathan Madison is a resident fellow for the R Street Institute Governance Policy Program.