The immediate reaction to the title of this editorial comment from the vast majority of readers, is as I suspect,
Unbelievable, wild statement; No way; I love my HOA; the volunteers work for the community; the board of directors has my interests at heart; I can vote for the directors and on other matters, And anyway, I really don’t care, I’m happy with the amenities, facilities, and protection of my property value.
This blindness toward compliance with the US Constitution and the laws of the land can be traced to the culture of the HOA-Land Nation as I presented in Part 1 of The HOA-Land Nation Within America. As for the false argument that because members can vote for a board of directors makes the HOA democratic, ignores the reality of Cuba, China, Russia, North Korea and other countries where people can also vote for their leaders. Voting alone does not make a democracy.
Other aspects of the HOA model of government that illustrate departures from public government, the Constitution and laws of the land can be found in the HOA-Land Nation publication: lack of oversight protections and the absence of a separation of powers, especially there is no independent judicial function for fair hearings; an absence of meaningful penalties against acts of the Board amounting to absolute immunity; and inadequate fair election procedures as found in public elections.
In all practicality, the HOA private government is based on a business model and not a municipality model, and whoever described a business as being democratic? As such, following the business model, the HOA is a one-party government; the party of the incumbents who control the selection of candidates, who can vote, and the election procedures designed to keep the establishment in power.
Here’s what Gandhi had to say about one-party governments and democracy. With the independence of India from British control in 1947, Mahatma Gandhi reflected on the dominance of the Indian National Congress Party over the newly formed government.
“[Gandhi] realized that a one-party system could actually be a no-party system, for when the government and party are one, the party is a rubber stamp and leads only to a fictitious existence.
‘Without free criticism and potent opposition, democracy dies.
‘Without political criticism and opposition, a nation’s intellect, culture and public morality stagnate; big men are purged and small men become kowtowing pygmies. The leaders surround themselves with cowards, sycophants and groveling yes-men whose automatic approval is misread as a tribute to greatness.’”
(The Life of Mahatma Gandhi, Louis Fischer, The Eaton Press, collector’s edition (1988, initially 1950).
The common culture within the HOA-Land Nation treats any criticism, any opposition, any independent thought not supported or approved by the board of directors as subversive. The members are inculcated into adopting and supporting this attitude and treat such views as harmful to the peace and harmony of the community. Committees of members — opposing political parties – are attacked and treated with hostility. Free political speech and dissent is not tolerated.
With 23% plus Americans living in HOA-Land, the HOA culture has had its effect on national, state and local politics; ignoring the Constitution and laws of the land are easily acceptable and do not constitute a problem for HOA members.