The Three Musketeers, the Constitution, and Jesus

 I just finished reading the last book in Alexandre Dumas’ series that begins with The Three Musketeers and ends with The Man in the Iron Mask. Though American films focus on the swashbuckling and daring-do exploits of Athos, Porthos, Aramis, and D’Artagnan, the first and last novels about these four heroes spend very little time on “action scenes.” The books are about political intrigue, shifting alliances, and obscure courtly conversations.

 What keeps the plots churning in Dumas’ work? Loyalty. Who is really loyal to the king? Who will gain the king’s favor by loyalty, and who might have his fierce loyalty undercut by deception? In courts, countries, and economies overseen by royals, loyalty is the sole currency that matters. The Man in the Iron Mask ends with nobility of extreme wealth falling into disgrace by a single word from the king, and another of little means gaining glory by dedication to the same king.

 For someone like me, who grew up living in a nation governed by a Constitution and written laws, the world of Dumas’ novels seems like a fantasy. We don’t need to worry about our accounts getting drained by our state Senator because the political winds have shifted. We know the rules, and we know that there are layers of courts and judges to interpret those rules. This makes the country I live in a relatively reliable and predictable place because we have a system of governance based on a written document.

 There is a problem, of course. Working under a constitution means that change is slow. Committees, boards, or congresses of elected officials make interpretive decisions, which means adaptation comes only after long argument and compromise. If we want change fast, it is easier to allow someone to rule by fiat. When one person runs the whole system, things get done. We are in a political moment now in which Americans want things done faster at the higher levels—even if the system is not designed to allow them that kind of power.

 What comes hand-in-hand with this kind of leadership is the power of loyalty. Like Dumas’ King Louis XIII and XIV, rule by fiat also allows destruction of opponents. When we accept people in power who “get things done,” we invite the possibility that we shall be done away with.

 There is a trade-off inherent in these two political systems. If we invest our political capital in a document that describes a system of laws, then our political process will be one of continuing debate in which everyone is welcome. And change will be slow. If we invest that capital in leaders, changes will come fast and dissenting voices will be removed or destroyed.

 Because we tend to believe strongly that we’re right, our politics inevitably moves toward having a king, a monarch, an executive director. Keeping a deliberative system of government that embraces both majority rule and minority voice takes constant effort. Will we put in that effort?