Increasingly, Jordanians say they think little of Parliament, if they think of it at all.

Once revered as the “people’s house,” Parliament is now being dismissed by some as a “house of embarrassment.”

A reminder why was a mass brawl last week during a debate over constitutional amendments that featured punches, body slams, headlocks, and a house speaker ordering lawmakers to “shut up!” It gave another black eye to an institution seen as less representative, or relevant, than in the past.

Two decades of gerrymandering and electoral engineering by governments eager to suppress dissent have filled the legislature with MPs hand-picked for loyalty but lacking ideology or policies.

“Our Parliament is a sideshow; we don’t hear from them when it matters, and when we do hear from them, we wished we hadn’t,” says Bassam, a former military officer who asked that his full name not be used. “Our representatives don’t represent anyone but themselves.”

With faith in democracy and its institutions being tested around the world, and authoritarians flexing their own political muscles, voters in Jordan say they have given up on an institution that simply rubber-stamps legislation submitted by the royally appointed government.

“We vote for people to stand up to government policies, but they let us down each time,” says Bassam. “They only do what the government wants.”

Some say MPs publicly rail against unpopular government proposals, such as tax hikes, but then just fall in line.

“Ninety-nine MPs scream and shout they are against a law, but one telephone call later and they all vote in favor of it the very next day,” says Abdullah Youssef, a clerk in Amman.

Says Oraib Rantawi, director of the Amman-based Al Quds Center for Political Studies: “Jordan today is one of the only countries in the world where people are happy when the king dissolves Parliament.”

Vote of no-confidence

A royal committee is rushing reforms through Parliament it says can rebuild Jordanians’ trust in the system and regain their faith in the elected body.

Among the changes are steps to restore national parties’ representation and increase roles of women and young people in party politics.

But those moves, which coincide with others that reduce Parliament’s authority, may do little to restore the body’s stature.

Jehad Shelbak/Reuters

Members of Parliament attend a session in Amman, Jordan, Jan. 6, 2022. A royal committee is rushing reforms through Parliament that it says can regain voters' faith in the elected body.

In an October public opinion survey by the Center for Strategic Studies at the University of Jordan, 15% of Jordanians expressed confidence in Parliament, making it the least-trusted institution in the kingdom, behind the army (91%), judiciary (53%), media (39%), unions (36%), and the government (33%).

In October 2020 parliamentary elections, 29% of eligible voters cast a ballot – the lowest participation rate ever in a Jordanian legislative election.

Mr. Rantawi says the plunge in support “comes after attempts by successive governments to discredit Parliament in the minds of the people and reduce Parliament’s role in the political process.”

It is an accusation repeated by MPs.

“In Jordan, Parliament is the people’s power. The only way to take away people’s power is to convince them that they no longer have it,” says Saleh Armouti, an opposition MP aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood’s Islah coalition. “This is why the government sabotages Parliament – to make it appear incapable of bettering people’s lives.”

Islamist “scare”

The directly elected body was celebrated by Jordanians when it was reintroduced after a 22-year absence in 1989 by King Hussein, who lifted martial law in the face of mass protests over rising prices.

The 1989 elections saw a 54% turnout. The Muslim Brotherhood’s Islamist party snagged 22 out of the then-80 seats in the legislature, creating the largest bloc.

In 1993, faced with the rising influence of the Brotherhood and opposition voices as Jordan neared a peace treaty with Israel, the government amended the elections law to minimize the presence of outspoken parties.

With each subsequent election, the government altered the system further to favor independent, tribal, and regional candidates over political parties.

For the past two decades, these laws combined with gerrymandering, rampant vote-buying, and alleged interference by security services to fill Parliament with pro-regime loyalists and others without party affiliation, political ideology, or policy proposals.

Only a dozen independents and opposition figures reached Parliament each election.

“Money, tribalism, special interests, and the interference of state agencies have created bad Parliaments that do not represent Jordanians’ dreams, wishes, and aspirations or even reflect their own ideas and values,” says Rula al-Hroub, an MP from 2013 to 2016 and secretary-general of the secular, center-left Stronger Jordan Party.

With the influx of independent candidates, Parliament became dominated by performance politics.

Unable to vote against or defeat government motions, many MPs instead took to shouting and threatening violence in theatrical forms of aggression that made them appear tough to their constituents – without the hard work of legislating policy.  

But in recent years, even the performance art has lost its political edge.

The brawl last week, which erupted during a discussion to add “Jordanian women” to the constitution’s preamble protecting individuals’ rights, was over a perceived personal slight between MPs.

“The vast majority of MPs come in as individuals, so they believe in their own egos, their sub-identities, their region, and their tribe. They have no political identity or agenda by which to organize their work,” says Amer Bani Amer, director of Rased, an election- and Parliament-monitoring nongovernmental organization.  

“They are not accepting of an open dialogue, and this is a reflection of broader trends in society.”

Repairing the social contract

The loss of faith in Parliament comes at a time of acute economic hardship and social unrest in the kingdom.

The unemployment rate hovers around 28%. Jordanians’ trust in one another is at an all-time low.

Last summer, weeks after an alleged coup plot involving his half brother, King Abdullah formed a committee of politicians and experts across the political spectrum to help reboot and modernize the country’s political system “for a new and critical phase.”

Hannah McKay/AP/File

King Abdullah II of Jordan at a meeting with British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, in London, Oct. 28, 2021. Constitutional amendments rushed through Jordan's Parliament this week have broadened the king's authorities, activists and legal experts say.

The royal committee zeroed in on saving Parliament as key to repairing the social contract.

The committee’s reforms include reserving 30% of Parliaments’ seats for political parties at the national level, to be raised incrementally to 60% of seats over successive elections.

Others include requiring that political parties’ membership be at least 20% women and 20% below the age of 35, and lowering the minimum age for MPs to 25.

But with these changes have also come a host of constitutional amendments that activists and legal experts say have gutted Parliament’s powers, and broadened the king’s powers.

They include removal of an article requiring the prime minister to resign following the dissolution of Parliament – opening the door for king-appointed governments to govern in the absence of Parliament – and another measure granting the king the authority to appoint and remove senior officials and judges.

The amendments also formed a new body, the National Security Council, hand-picked by the king, which would exert authority over foreign policy and security outside parliamentary oversight.

What is left for parties?

These amendments have been rushed through Parliament this week with little discussion.

“They have stripped Parliament of all its authority,” says Ms. Al-Hroub, the former MP. “As a political party, why should I run in the next elections? What is even left for political parties?”

Many Jordanians are nonplussed by the amendments, if they have heard of them.

“No changes they make to Parliament, the law, or constitution will change the fact that they don’t want us to have a say in economic policy at home or foreign policy abroad,” says Zayd, a 30-something plumber.

“If I see a political party that represents my demands for a fair economy, cracking down on corruption, and ends all cooperation with Israel, I would vote for them,” says Rawwan, a university graduate. “But I doubt that any political party will be allowed to say what Jordanians actually think.”

For now, the brawls, near and far, give some pause.

“If American political supporters can ransack the Capitol and destroy Congress, what hope do we have for our MPs here in Jordan?” says Mohammed Hamzah, a taxi driver.

Not all Jordanians are pessimistic, however.

Ahmed, an engineering student paying for university by waiting tables at a downtown Amman restaurant, says reforms encouraging youth to enter politics could pave the way for positive change.

“If we can have more youth in Parliament and streamline my generation’s vision with the experience of veteran MPs, we can do a lot of good for our country,” says Ahmed, who doesn’t rule out running for office one day. 

“We have many things to contribute to better our country. All we need is the opportunity.”

Angela Merkel, the former German chancellor, refused to call herself a feminist. But after stepping down last year following 16 years in power, it’s now clear her strongest legacy might be the path she’s paved for other women.

Chancellor Olaf Scholz has appointed eight women to his Cabinet, including the key positions of foreign affairs, security, and defense in Europe’s powerhouse economy. That makes the gender balance in his cabinet exactly 50-50.

“We’re sure it’s the right thing to do ... that represents the society in which we live, in which men and women each make up half of the population and in which it should be normal that women have half the power,” Mr. Scholz said in a press conference last month announcing the picks.

There’s much to be done, such as narrowing the gender pay gap, providing paternity leave, and boosting more women into STEM fields. But many experts view gender parity in the Cabinet as an important first step toward progress for Germany, which has lagged on many of the traditional metrics.

“It’s definitely a strong sign on a symbolic level. Already under Ms. Merkel, women in political leadership appeared more and more frequently, even in right-wing parties,” says Annette Henninger, a politics and gender relations professor at Philipps University of Marburg. “Now it seems that gender stereotypes are really starting to change.”

On the rise

Ms. Merkel has long been a rare female leader in the conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU). And, while her ascendance to German chancellor was hailed around the world – during President Donald Trump’s tenure she was oft-referred to as the last defender of liberal democracy – women at home found limited success under her helm.

As chancellor, Ms. Merkel did appoint Germany’s first and second female defense ministers, Ursula von der Leyen and Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer. But Ms. Kramp-Karrenbauer struggled to consolidate power within her political party and later stepped down from political life. Annalena Baerbock’s rousing ascendance as a Green Party candidate for chancellor lasted only weeks, and she was roundly attacked online and in the media. The treatment, experts said, was rooted in gender bias.  

Michael Sohn/AP

Having named women to lead half of the German Cabinet – including the key positions of foreign affairs, security, and defense – Chancellor Olaf Scholz has said, “Security will lie in the hands of strong women in this government.”

Ms. Merkel herself never proclaimed a strong position on women’s rights, perhaps because she couldn’t in a male-dominated political world. She had spoken out for the need to put more women on Germany’s corporate boards, but within the CDU she had to tread carefully.

“She certainly has experienced enough misogyny in her time – back in the 90s the CDU was full of terrible men,” says Ursula Münch, political scientist and current director of the independent think tank Academy for Political Education in Bavaria.

“Female empowerment was never something Merkel did openly,” she says. “She didn’t consciously play that card because she knows that with this card, you can only win over those who are already on your side.”

In Berlin in 2017, when Ms. Merkel was asked whether she is a feminist, she responded with a bland non-answer: “To be honest, the history of feminism is one with which I have common ground but also differences, and I don’t want to embellish myself with a title I don’t have.”

Indeed, the reality for women in Germany has been remarkably unprogressive. In Parliament, women hold only 35% of seats, while only three of Germany’s 16 states are led by women. In Germany’s corporate sector, men dominate, with more than 600 male executives to only 93 women serving on the boards of companies making up Germany’s main stock market indexes, according to the AllBright Foundation.

Women are paid on average 80% of what men make in Germany, marking one of the highest gender pay gaps among European Union member states. Germany’s criminal code also makes abortion – both for the woman seeking one and the practitioner performing the procedure – technically punishable by fines or prison time. Another section prohibits advertising for abortions. 

Working mothers also need easier access to child care, and income needs to increase in professions dominated by women, such as nursing, says Dr. Henninger. Women’s shelters also need more resources.

Changing minds

In other words, there’s plenty of work to do. Yet, hopes are high that Germany’s first gender-equal Cabinet will mark a new chapter.

For starters, as Chancellor Scholz has said, “Security will lie in the hands of strong women in this government.”  

The Cabinet members in charge of security have already touted a harder line than their predecessors. The foreign minister, Ms. Baerbock, wants Germany to take a tough stance in addressing Russia’s regional, and China’s global, ambitions. The interior minister, Nancy Faeser, has promised to fight far-right extremism and threats to Germany’s liberal democracy. Christine Lambrecht, who will oversee defense, has vowed to properly fund Germany’s military, which has for years been under-resourced.

And there’s talk that attention will finally be paid to advancing women-friendly policies. Agenda 2030, a package of sustainable development goals that include gender equality, contains milestones such as reducing the gender pay gap, encouraging more girls to enter STEM fields, and boosting the percentage of women on companies’ supervisory boards to 30%.

“We expect that all departments will take responsibility and actively develop the government’s equality strategy,” says Elke Ferner, chairwoman of U.N. Women Germany.

Today women with small children are now in leading government positions, which represents a sea change from the time when people speculated about former Defense Minister and current European Commission President Ms. von der Leyen’s child care arrangements. (She has seven children.) “Now, the question of ‘Can she really do that?’ is not being asked anymore,” says Dr. Henninger.

“Women in Germany have gotten stronger over the past years. They have organized themselves across all sectors and age groups and found their voice,” says Jutta Allmendinger, a gender inequality expert and president of the research institute WZB Berlin Social Science Center. “I think Olaf Scholz really had no other choice.”

As the first woman at the head of the government, Ms. Merkel set a standard that Germany now must build upon, says Ms. Ferner of U.N. Women Germany. “Now it’s about changing basic conditions so that equal participation for women is possible in all areas.”

AP/File

The interactive artwork "me + you" is part of the Smithsonian exhibition "Futures" in Washington, D.C.

To quote baseball philosopher Yogi Berra, “The future ain’t what it used to be.”

It can be a challenge these days not to make long mental worry lists about what might lie ahead. But a more productive mindset might ask: What should the future be like? How do we make it better than today? How do we make that happen?

In a winter of international and domestic U.S. tensions, a new exhibition titled “Futures” at the Smithsonian Institution in Washington invites visitors to explore intriguing exhibits showing future possibilities. It then asks them to join in creating that future, such as in designing a city of tomorrow (with an assist from some artificial intelligence).

The exhibit has taken over the Smithsonian’s venerable Arts and Industries Building (AIB), which had been shuttered nearly two decades for repairs. At one time it housed treasures such as the Wright brothers’ airplane, the original “Star-Spangled Banner,” and the Apollo 11 command module used as part of the first moon landing. All were relocated to other Smithsonian venues long ago.

Imagining future possibilities can fire up visions of a better society. What about a ground-based, 600-mph tube transit system that could transport travelers between American cities in minutes? That’s just one possibility presented.

Calls for exhibits to include in “Futures” brought eager replies. 

“Everybody wanted to be part of this exhibition because there’s a real hunger on the part of artists, designers, and scientists to be part of a narrative that allows people to imagine the future they want and not the future they fear,” Rachel Goslins, director of the AIB, told The Guardian. “To be part of an exhibition that came from a place of hopefulness about the future was attractive.” 

“Futures” will run through July 6, 2022.

Change alone doesn’t always represent progress. The exhibit reminds us that inventions that at one time showed great promise, such as plastics, now may be seen as mixed blessings (plastic pollution).

Trying to predict what lies ahead is a notoriously futile business. But imagining possibilities can lead thinking into fresh, innovative channels. 

“What we want people to take away is that there are solutions out there, there are answers out there,” Ms. Goslins says. “We have to pick them, and we have to invest in them.”

Last year the Smithsonian celebrated its 175th year. “Futures” is a reminder “that the best museums are as much about today and tomorrow as they are about yesterday,” writes Lonnie G. Bunch III, secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, in its magazine.

As 2022 unfolds, inspiration and creativity are needed more than ever. Finding innovative answers isn’t mysterious: It’s mostly accomplished through hard work, as Thomas Edison and others have pointed out. 

New ideas are available to any of us as we stop and quietly listen for our own best thoughts.