Humility in Politics, When it’s Not Convenient

Turn to any news network these days and you’re guaranteed to see the same thing: a well-groomed, suit and tied, Republican candidate for the 2012 presidential nomination. If it’s Mitt Romney, he’s probably arguing that, as a man worth nearly $300 million, he can connect with the average Joe. If it’s Newt Gingrich, he’ll be defending his marital infidelities, or alleged lobbying for Freddie Mac.

This political posturing is to be expected: Candidates must — and should — defend their records. Unfortunately, most politicians’ defense mechanism entails shrinking up and brushing questions off, rather than admitting their faults.

Now take Helena Drnovsek Zorko, Slovenia’s ambassador to Japan and endorser of the controversial Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), a bill that many see as a direct violation of civil liberties on the Internet. On January 31, Zorko came forward and distributed a direct apology to the people she represents for signing the bill. She hadn’t looked at ACTA closely enough, she said, and signed it without realizing the implications it would have for people’s personal freedom.

“I signed ACTA out of civic carelessness, because I did not pay enough attention,” said Zorko. “Let my example be a cautionary tale of how swiftly we can make mistakes if we allow ourselves to slip.”

Zorko then went further, calling for citizens in Slovenia to converge for a mass rally in the capital, Ljubljana. And while she may not be the most well-known or influential figure on the world stage, politicians could learn something by reading her statement.

The kind of humility that Zorko demonstrated is rarely found in politics. The U.S. is rife with flip-flopping politicians, but few of them admit to their past mistakes on policy, unless it is for their own benefit — in most cases, years later, when it is too late to do anything about it.

Take the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012, which, besides providing funding for the armed forces, authorizes indefinite military detention of American citizens and others who engage in belligerent acts of war against the United States. Many have called the bill a direct violation of habeas corpus and therefore unconstitutional. In the days and weeks leading up to Congress’s vote and Obama’s endorsement of it, there was national outcry about its content, with both liberals and conservatives speaking out against it.

And yet it passed with an overwhelming 97-3 majority in the Senate. With so much criticism, though, it wouldn’t be a surprise to see politicians backpedaling on their vote four years down the line in, say, the middle of a presidential campaign. That’s what we expect. Because we don’t see politicians as equal to ourselves — we see them as caricatures, certain of their own ideological purity, bound by party ideals. An admission of ignorance or self-doubt after the debate would, in our political system, have marked a member of Congress as weak and vulnerable in the next election.

But political figures, like everyone else, can make mistakes, change their minds, and do things that they one day might regret.

When Zorko apologized for signing ACTA, she had no hidden agenda. She was simply admitting to her mistake, apologizing for it, and trying to make amends — something that we never see our own representatives do, save for the few times when, after cheating on a wife or getting caught with a prostitute, they issue a tearful public apology.

Politicians should not pretend to be experts on every subject. Humility is a noble trait that is punishable in our political system. Perhaps if we judged politicians by the same standards we judge ourselves we would be left with a more honest debate.