Although part of your analysis is incorrect:
And that is exactly what we have seen from conservative "governance" over the past six years: protecting the nation always trumps protecting our democracy for them.

Though I do agree that protecting Democracy and upholding the Constitution should of course be #1, I disagree with your assertion that they've made protecting the nation their #1 priority.  They have done absolutely nothing to protect our nation.  They have started two wars, one of which was justified but forgotten about before the mission was complete, the other was unjustified, unnecessary, and has left the nation less safe and created more enemies.

Brilliantly true -- every word of it.

Keith Olberman also responded to Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld and the "Security First -- Freedoms Second" crowd last evening.

Chris,
You write what I have been thinking for a long time.
Of course, it won't surprise us that this administration has its priorities all screwed up, and you have identified here perhaps the foremost example.

Thanks!
Bob in HI

On my summer vacation, I read Tom Holland's "Persian Fire" about the Greek/Persian war (the one Herodotos wrote about).

In the second year of the war, many of the Greek city-states were going wobbly and lukewarm on their support for Athens.  You have to remember that Persia had a huge navy and army (estimates of 250,000 soldiers).  Anybody they vanquished would have their women raped, their men castrated, all sold into slavery.

Xerxes makes overtures to Athens, to break up the Athens/Sparta alliance.  Come under my rule and not only will bygones be bygones, I'll reward you with all kinds of treasures.

Athens won't bite.  Why?  Because by then they had 30 years experience of democracy, and they wouldn't give it up despite Xerxes' offer, and despite the horrendous consequences if they lost.

I almost cried when I read it.

Exactly right, Chris.  Look at the presidential oath: "I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."  That's right there in Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution.

Bonus item: notice "swear (or affirm)" -- religious tolerance, even for the chief executive.

Absolutely.  I've been seeing it around lately, and we need to push the message:  We are proud, patriotic, red-blooded AMERICANS, not sniveling cowards saying, "Here, take my rights, take my freedoms my ancestors died for.  Just don't let the bad guys hit me again."  

Yes, 9/11 was terrible.  It was despicable.  It was criminal.  But it was just one attack.  It wasn't an excuse to destroy everything in our heritage.

The day the unconstitutional Patriot Act passed, the terrorists won.

As I read this article I felt the urge to say "Give me liberty or death!" Over and over again.  We are presently governed by Men who are, to their very core COWARDS. None of them have ventured into the Valley of Death called combat. This hell on earth has a profound impact on one very nature. It is sobering but most of all it gives a man/woman a perspective on the nature of fear. I came away from two years of combat in Vietnam with the ability to spot a coward a mile away. Bushbag and his entire entourage of neocons warmongers are the worst form of cowards. They are pompous and fearless when it comes to sending others to die or be maimed for their cowardly egos. They know deep down in side of themselves that they would be the very first to lie down and grovel at the feet of any adversary and with out hesitation sell out Democracy to save their own skins. Never forget the nature of those who we are governed by. Chickenhawks one and all.

Well said Chris!  State Security is an idol and like all idols it demands human sacrifices.  Idols always have and always will.

When you say

I should not be blogging this late

Nothing gives me the heebie jeebies more than to hear stuff like

For America, Democracy Is Always More Important Than Security

The words democracy, socialism, freedom, patriotic, realistic, justice, have each of them several different meanings which cannot be reconciled with one another. In the case of a word like democracy, not only is there no agreed definition, but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides. It is almost universally felt that when we call a country democratic we are praising it: consequently the defenders of every kind of regime claim that it is a democracy, and fear that they might have to stop using the word if it were tied down to any one meaning. Words of this kind are often used in a consciously dishonest way. That is, the person who uses them has his own private definition, but allows his hearer to think he means something quite different. Statements like Marshal Petain was a true patriot, The Soviet Press is the freest in the world, The Catholic Church is opposed to persecution, are almost always made with intent to deceive. Other words used in variable meanings, in most cases more or less dishonestly, are: class, totalitarian, science, progressive, reactionary bourgeois, equality.

Tony Blair produces acres of bilge along the same lines.

The case against the current regime does not depend on such rhetoric, thank God.

Chris's

When Americans start worshiping our borders, our "homeland," our military and our security instead of our freedoms, our march of progress, our opportunity, and our transformational power in the world, then we are worshiping false idols.

Politics is the last field of human endeavor in which worshiping ought to be taking place...

And isn't it a delicious irony that the conservatives' current reasoning for our occupation of Iraq is to spread "democracy" even as they pull that very rug out from under us right here stateside? The blatant hypocrisy of the current administration is truly galling.

damned right.  great post.

Refreshing.

Dwight Eisenhower once said, "If you want total security, go to prison. There you're fed, clothed, given medical care and so on. The only thing lacking... is freedom."  Consider that on the local, then national, and then the international level.  When our freedoms were first being intruded upon in the aftermath of September 11th there were those people who said that it was for the betterment of society as a whole, that if we were to move forward that we should accept certain limitations on our freedoms and thus our democracy.  Then there were those of us who said that once you start taking and chipping away that there will never be an end in sight, if you give a mouse a cookie...

Now look where we are.

I cannot believe no one has quoted Benjamin Franklin yet!

"They who would sacrifice essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither."

Or Thomas Jefferson:

"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

For more than two hundred years, Americans in the military have fought and died not for security, but for freedom.  Anyone who would try to reverse those priorities isn't a true American.

Without democracy or liberty there is no security.  Once we lose those our own government becomes the threat.

Great post. I agree that the argument by the right about security vs. freedom is bullshit. I always ask them, would you rather fight and potentially die to live freely or would you perfer the "security" of a dictorship like in Iraq under Saddam. The truth is that more people have fought and died to avoid that kind of "security" then for any other reason.

This idea that we need to chose freedom or security is a false choice and it demeans the sacrifice that our troops have made fighting to ensure we are even able to have this debate. If we are to allow law breaking on the grounds of ensuring "security" we are walking on a slippery slope which will inevitable lead to the end of the american regime and nothing less than the tyranny that the founding fathers sought to prevent.

I disagre. I would say our FREEDOM is more important than our security. Democracy is only a part of that.

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." -- Benjamin Franklin.

After all, our citizens (and even many non-citizens) have literally given up tehir lives for our FREEDOM over the past 230 years.

"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty or safety . . ." -- Benjamin Franklin.

Fantastic, Chris.  I agree with earlier posts stating that liberty, or freedom, is that which is more important than security. Personally, I took your usage of 'democracy' as synonymous with a free, liberal society. We do not have nearly enough people trumpeting OUR liberty and the need to protect OUR liberty.

Your views, as well as Keith Olbermann's need to be broadcast further. I have a feeling that are much more widespread than anybody thinks. Much further than the "progressive" blogosphere.

I have to echo the comment from upthread, you need to post late more often if this is what we get.  Great thought here and more of out candidates need to be saying this.

Well said, Chris. But I think the challenge is to break through the thick mass of misused language and fear-mongering, to penetrate the psyche of our fellow citizens. The words "democracy" and "freedom" have unfortunately become so misused as to be disconnected from their practical meaning in modern political debate.  They are too often used as slogans behind which all sorts of anti-democracy and anti-freedom actions and agendas can be camouflaged--especially when their use is mixed with fear-mongering.

Key elements of our democracy are seriously debilitated and I think part of the message and agenda needs to be an identification of specific changes that need to be made--key problems/failures and practical solutions to them.  This can give substance and a revitalized meaning to calls for protection of American democracy.  Otherwise, I think too many people will hear the message only at the level of another election-year slogan that means and motivates very little.

One aid to this could be linking the "protecting American democracy" theme to the "accountability" theme.  Accountability is, after all, an essential component of democracy. This would also help us link the many failures and corruptions of the Bush Admin to the need to protect and strengthen our democratic processes and systems.

Iraq and Katrina are probably the two most vivid and painful manifestations of the lack of accountability and failures of our democratic processes (which are what have created the government that has dismally failed us).  Their vividness can and should be used to break through the cloud of political obfuscation that has blinded the mind and weakened the spirit of too many Americans.  They should be used as wedges into the overloaded and debilitated American psyche, where dormant aspirations for real freedom and renewed democracy can be stirred and fleshed out out with general and specific political agendas.

To deliver this message, we need leaders who can be strong, clear, smart and inspiring in both their critiques and their proposals for solutions.  I expressed some thoughts and suggestions on this in a few diary posts:
http://mydd.com/story/2006/8/12/155551/9 41
http://mydd.com/story/2006/8/12/4316/185 64

Before anyone begins to accuse me of being a troll or being a Republican in hiding, this is not the case. I've been reading this site for a long time, sometimes agree (more often than not), sometimes not, but this time I felt like I had to respond. This post disturbs me greatly, and here's why.

America was founded on "democracy". True, it is our founding glory and exemplifies the best of this country. And true, the Bush administration has given short thrift to protecting democracy at the cost of other things. But, let's get to the point. I believe it is deeply flawed to think that the average American cares more about the vague, all-powerful concept of "democracy" than about personal security. There is no society of which I know of that would give up their rights to security. Security in the sense of protecting your land, your country, and your home is in every sense more important than high-minded concepts of democracy and freedoms and civil rights and all that. Personal security -- extend that even to the security of our country is one of the basic human needs!

It just seems to me that this is why to the average American Democrats in general have been getting shellacked and trampled on and generally laughed off in recent years, all the way back to 2000. The basic Democratic line is "we'll protect your democracy, we'll protect your freedoms, we'll protect your civil rights, we'll protect your Social Security, and we'll make education better, help the economy ... "

Now, what has been the basic Republican line? "We'll protect YOU." Put aside your knee-jerk reaction to this for a moment, I know you're thinking "but Republicans haven't really protected us, they've led us to Iraq and have genuinely messed things up there!"

THIS is why Democrats have been exemplified as the  nervous, waffling bumblers that they quite honestly have been. I say this as a proud Democrat myself.

But I cannot emphasize enough that security is always going to be the most important thing, whether consciously or not, and I'm not even talking about elections, but more generally. Republicans' success at elections for the past few years have been explicitly built around this basic human need for security, to feel safe, and I feel that we as Democrats are simply not getting the message.

Call me whatever you want, hate me and ignore my post, it doesn't really matter. But I just had to respond to the idea that democracy is more important than security.

This post is exactly why we as Democrats are seen the way we are, and why Republicans have been so successful. If we can't understand the very basic point of people needing to feel safe -- i.e., security -- then we really don't deserve to win, I'm sorry.

...I think it's a debate that needs to happen. Lay everything on the table and decide, do you want a coutry where you are free or a police-state. It's that simple. Democracy does not cure all ills as has been so amply demonstrated, what do you do if the people honestly want a police-state?

Depending on the numbers I'd fight or leave.

Conservatives pledge allegiance to the flag, the rest of us pledge allegiance to the republic for which it stands.  

The concept that the republic as an idea is more important than its physical manifestation seems to elude most conservatives.  Hence the furor over banning the burning of the flag.  A republic which values free speech is not offended in the least if a flag is burned, but to these nitwits the flag IS the republic.  The nation IS democracy.  They can't separate the physical commodity which can be bought and sold and owned from the larger idea that is free to all.

Chills.....

AntonX2 wrote,

 But I cannot emphasize enough that security is always going to be the most important thing, whether consciously or not, and I'm not even talking about elections, but more generally. Republicans' success at elections for the past few years have been explicitly built around this basic human need for security, to feel safe, and I feel that we as Democrats are simply not getting the message.  

This is close but not quite right, because what's at stake is not security, but feeling secure. The Republican Black Magic on this has been to hoodwink the nation into feeling more secure by sending more than 100,000 troops halfway around the world to stir up a hornet's nest, while neglecting our borders and ports at home. The Bush administration has NOT made us more secure, but has beguiled us into thinking it so.

Democracy IS more important than security. But here's an important thought: Democracy is not something we have, but something we must continuously strive for. In this sense, its somewhat like Camelot: Something Good that we have sampled, and yearn for, that calls out the best in us.

Fixating on security makes us risk-averse. The American people have shown, time and again, that we are not risk-averse, when there is an important goal to achieve.

Bob in HI