Not for nothing, but "Democracy is messy" is actually a Famous Donald Rumsfeld quote.
In an interview with NBC's Kristen Welker, Bernie Sanders attempted to clarify:
“The media often takes words out of context. The context of that is democracy is messy, that people will have a vigorous debate on the issues,”
Bernie was referring of course to this AP interview:
"I think if they make the right choice and open the doors to working-class people and young people and create the kind of dynamism that the Democratic Party needs, it's going to be messy," Sanders said.
"Democracy is not always nice and quiet and gentle but that is where the Democratic Party should go."
Asked if the convention could be problematical, Sanders said: "So what? Democracy is messy. Everyday my life is messy. But if you want everything to be quiet and orderly and allow, you know, just things to proceed without vigorous debate, that is not what democracy is about
Ok, Bernie, the media does often take words out of context. But, in explaining what you meant we may need more than “The context of that is democracy is messy, that people will have a vigorous debate on the issues”
I think we could have asked 100 people, Family Feud style, to describe a “vigorous debate” and “messy” would land the big red X every time.
Lets take the first Democratic debate this cycle. There were five candidates vigorously debating. Bernie was there. It was pretty much universally hailed as a great debate. Heck we were even a bit smug because it wasn’t like the GOP fiascos that had come before.
It wasn’t messy. Bernie wasn’t messy. Did he not vigorously debate?
So I am still not sure what messy means in this context. Lets check with Jeff Weaver’s CNN interview.
Weaver told CNN's Alisyn Camerota there's no concern that Sanders supporters will misinterpret "get messy" as advocating aggression; they know that it means heated debate.
"We're just going to have votes on the floor of the convention. That's all. There will be debate and there will be votes," he said.
Well I may have lower standards, but that doesn’t sound like something anyone would describe as “messy.” I would say it sounds rather tidy, if unnecessarily annoying.
Oh well, I guess different people say things differently. I won’t fault Bernie there.
Unfortunately, when Welker implied that Clinton holds a significant lead with pledged delegates as well as super delegates, and was looking more and more like the Democratic nominee, the interview got a bit… messy.
"Well, I guess if we take your assumption and Clinton supporters' assumption to the logical conclusion, you know what we should do? We should go back to a monarchy, and not have any elections at all,” Sanders shot back.
Forget “messy” Bernie seems to be struggling with what a “monarchy” is. I am no expert but I am pretty sure delegate leads are not involved in selection the head-of-state.
Interestingly, in monarchies and dictatorships power changes hands in methods that are actually messy.
In fact Thomas Jefferson called his own election the “Revolution of 1800” because it was the first time power moved form one party to another “not effected indeed by the sword, as that, but by the rational and peaceable instrument of reform, the suffrage of the people.”
You know who finds Democracy messy?
This guy.
Update:
A lot of people are not getting my point. Given the givens, that means I am not presenting it clearly and I apologize.
1. I am not saying there should not be debate, even “vigorous debate.” I am saying vigorous debate conducted civilly is not messy. Again look at most of the Democratic debates this cycle. Vigorous? Yes. Messy? No.
2. Things can and do get messy in a Democracy, but that is not because of democracy, it is almost always because of an attempt to subvert democracy. The institution of slavery, for example, happened in a democracy. Not because of democracy. But people were treated as less than others.
3. Even if things get messy in a democracy, that is a bug, not a feature. Should we not strive toward order. Even what Bernie proposes, IE floor votes at the convention are part of an orderly process. That is why people get worried and confused when Bernie says the convention will be “messy.”
Normally this would be a semantic argument. But stating a convention will be “messy” immediately after the Nevada SNAFU, is tone deaf.
The title was a poor choice. I should, perhaps have said “Vigorous Debate Needn’t Me Messy.” I would change it, but I feel that would make it look like some of the commenters criticizing the diary, nearly all of whom have valid points, look like they were presenting a strawman argument, and I would not want to make others look foolish to cover my own errors.
