What does the ‘filibuster’ have to do with pirates?

Etymologically, filibuster has more to do with conflict than with consensus. Fittingly, conflict is what filibusters tend to create in legislatures.

|
Staff

The filibuster sounds fun, as if Mary Poppins might sing about it, or Alice chat about it in Wonderland. What it denotes is anything but enjoyable, however: all the ways progress can be delayed or obstructed in a legislative body. Sometimes this involves arcane parliamentary motions or adding extraneous amendments to a bill under consideration. Famously, a filibuster can be a long speech, “an attempt to talk something to death,” as The New York Times described it in 1964.

In the U.S. Senate, filibusters rely on the rule of cloture (a French parliamentary term for “closure”). Most legislation needs only a simple majority of votes (51) to pass. To bring a bill to a vote, however, a supermajority (60) must agree to invoke cloture, which ends debate and allows the bill to proceed. If the minority party has 41 members who would vote “no” on cloture, they can block a piece of legislation indefinitely. When politicians discuss “ending the filibuster,” as Democrats did in January, they are really talking about eliminating this 60-vote threshold to allow bills to move forward.

Proponents of the filibuster, such as Republican Sen. Mitch McConnell, argue that it forces legislators toward “building stable consensus,” since the majority must work with the minority to pass bills. The Brennan Center for Justice, in contrast, claims that it has the opposite effect: “the ability of a small group to derail legislative action has prevented senators from working across party lines to engage in bipartisan deliberation and policymaking.”

Etymologically, filibuster has more to do with conflict than with consensus. It comes from the Dutch vrijbuiter, a 16th-century term for “plunderer.” The word bounced around several European languages and appeared in English as freebooter (“pirate”) and flibustier (an 18th-century pirate focused on attacking the Spanish in the West Indies) before settling down as filibuster. By the mid-19th century, filibusters were “American adventurers who ... participated in private military forces” that invaded countries “with which the United States was formally at peace.” The most famous filibuster of this sort, according to historian Robert May, was William Walker, a Tennessean who conquered and ruled Nicaragua for a few months in 1856.

The word was first used in a legislative sense in the mid-19th century. Filibustering senators were metaphorical pirates, stealing time and hijacking the priorities of the majority. Or they were mercenary interventionists, attempting to overthrow the plans of a duly elected legislative body.

The filibuster might sound inconsequential, but its effects on American democracy are profound.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to What does the ‘filibuster’ have to do with pirates?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/In-a-Word/2021/0304/What-does-the-filibuster-have-to-do-with-pirates
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe