View RSS Feed

Memories of the 28th Century

Defense of Democratic Governmental Institutions

Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average.
I realize that this is a minority view now. The U.S.A. is preparing to elect a president, who is of Benito Mussoliniís political stance, and the sitting president has already tried ruling by edict, and this is not a just a recent trend. U.S. presidents have been ignoring the limits on their office for decades, some more and some a little less. The Bushes both played fast and loose with the U.S. Constitution; W referred to it as a piece of paper in an attempt to show his respect for it. Clinton was sharp enough to be a little more subtle about it. But those presidents and their predecessors for decades had also played fast and loose. They may have thought that if it wasnít explicitly forbidden, then they could try it.

Congress during the last several decades has shown that there is value to having been on the debating team, and that there is life and pay after retirement, if you didnít make enough while in office. But Congress fails to take its role seriously only because the administrative branch of government doesnít take Congress seriously. Congress has ceded some of its law-making powers to federal agencies, because Congress apparently doesn't feel competent to make rules for micromanaging things. Perhaps they should have concluded that they shouldn't even try to micromanage everything. The U.S.A. was established so that people could take advantage of an economy that allowed them to live freely without government bothering them about every little detail. Perhaps we should try that kind of government again, a government that exists for the benefit of the people and that is run by the people.

For too long the U.S. government and most state governments have been run by professional politicians, who make their livings from the government, rather than having lives away from government. Henry David Thoreau wrote in his essay "Civil Disobedience" "That government is best which governs least." I think we should all reread that essay.

If we are not willing to follow the suggestions made by Mr Thoreau, then we should select me as emperor. I don't really want to be emperor, but if I were emperor, then we would not have to put up with elections and electioneering. The people would still be represented in the advisory council that I would establish, but those representatives wouldn't be able to decide how to spend money, so contractors and manufacturers wouldn't have any need to pay them for their services and votes. As emperor, I would select people who were beholding to me alone to run the apparatus of government, so there would be no question as to who anyone was working for, and the appointments would require that the appointees not work for any business they had dealt with in the case of them leaving government, or I would amerce them of all of their ill-gotten gains.

Even if we ignore the loss to the economy from the decrease of graft and from the loss of active political campaigning and lobbying, there would be gains for the economy, because people could busy themselves at whatever they do best. And the end of the close relationships between businesses and government would mean the end of wasteful bailouts. If decisions were made democratically, then everything has to get bailed out, and that has been mighty expensive. And if decisions were made by me there would be no bailouts, except for my personal friends.

The U.S.A. was set up to be a haven from taxes, but government tends to spend as much money as it can, and with all of those people involved in republican government there are lots of people to please. If I were emperor, then taxpayers would only have to satisfy me, and that would be possible with much smaller amounts of money. And beyond the imperial guard there would be little reason for military; those people just cost money to keep up, feed, and house and pay contractors. So we would save great amounts of taxes there. I wouldn't waste any more there either. The local lords would be responsible for keeping their people alive, so I wouldn't have to send anything to the various lords, earls, etc., and we would keep the people much better than they are kept now. Itís a matter of perspective. In a monarchy the people are instruments for the pleasure of the monarch and the lords, so the monarch and the lords keep the people well, but in a republic the people own and operate (or try to operate) the government, so they have to take care of themselves, and we know how capable they are of that.

The United States of America has been a federal republic for more than two hundred twenty-five years, and the people who have tried to run it have made a hash of things. Letís test the form of government and make me emperor for a few decades to see how things compare. If I do better, then we will retain the monarchy, but if I do worse, then we will return to a federal republic. That would be fair for everyone.


Link to Civil Disobedience
http://xroads.virginia.edu/~hyper/wa...ays/civil.html

Updated 03-22-2016 at 09:23 AM by PeterL

Categories
Uncategorized

Comments

  1. Dreamwoven's Avatar
    There is growing awareness of your position, one that is shared by Washington's Blog. Your Advisory Council would be well protected from democratic pretentions, and sounds like the EU.
  2. PeterL's Avatar
    The EU is retaining those elections and other features of democratic institutions. I propose that we eliminate those to see which system works better.
  3. Dreamwoven's Avatar
    You mean the pretentions to democracy that the EU have, in, for example its parliament, could be got rid of, to create a more purely fascistic form of governance. It might well be "better" in the sense of being more efficient if that is what you want.
  4. PeterL's Avatar
    I wouldn't put it that way, but essentially yes. It might be better in several senses, depending on who was serving as emperor, but it certainly would eliminate a lot of hot air in Brussels.

    If I were feeling more sarcastic today, then I would mention how most people would like to have government that would treat them the way their mothers did, when they were four years old, but I'm not quite there today. It would be easier for governments to be like pleasant uncles, who would give you candy and laugh with you before sending you off to play with the children, while uncle got serious with the adults and the drinks.
  5. Dreamwoven's Avatar
    "I wouldn't put it that way, but essentially yes"?

    And then you go further and mention how most people would like to have a government that would treat them like their mothers did?

    I would only say that this is not how political decision-making works. Electorates give politicians the power to take decisions on their behalf for a limited period, usually a number of years, then can vote them out and vote others in. This doesn't necessarily solve the problem but it is how most countries work. The EU is not a democracy it's an empire so perhaps we should not discuss it here at all.
  6. PeterL's Avatar
    While that isn't how political decision making works, and it isn't how political decision making should be done either, but there are many people who think that governments should operate that way. Governments have been operating that way for many centuries; although the degree of it varies greatly. The earliest example was the Roman Empire, where the plebes were given "bread and circuses". Dictators use the "bread and circuses" routine to take people's minds away from the actual government and to endear themselves to the people. Here in the U.S., Trump is selling him self in a "bread and circuses" style; he is being entertaining. To the recipient of government services the process is not important, but the results are very important.
    Updated 04-01-2016 at 01:39 PM by PeterL
  7. Dreamwoven's Avatar
    Your blog, PeterL, is one of the most engaging and interesting that I have come across.
  8. PeterL's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamwoven
    Your blog, PeterL, is one of the most engaging and interesting that I have come across.
    I'm glad that you enjoy it. I am flattered that some people like it.
    Updated 04-01-2016 at 01:41 PM by PeterL