Sure, none of these things are desirable. But they do prove the vitality of our democracy. The deterioration of democratic processes is evidenced not in the budget crisis, but in Congress' acquiescence in the invasion of Iraq, the apparent lack of any desire in Washington to criminally investigate the Bush Administration, and the legions of Obama-fixated citizens content with any and everything Obama is and has been doing.
I'm not at school today because of President's Day, a day for commercial sales, reverence for past Presidents, and for me, doing lots of homework (and sneaking in some blogging). This tradition concerns me however, because the nature of democracy is that of the rule of law exercised by an elected government, not of the benevolence or good nature of our rulers. While it's safe to revere dead statesmen (they can't come back and tyrannize us), we must be careful not to give this same reverence to our current politicians, most notably to the Office of the unduly-powerful President of the United States. No good can come out of faithfully adhering to what public officials tell us we should think. We can adhere, but only if we've critically examined what they've said and know it's valid. And even then. In 2003, the WMDs seemed to be valid.
Nor should Congress really listen to Obama's pleas that the apocalypse will be upon us if they don't blindly pass the stimulus. We're in a recession. Solidly. And a few days or weeks or a month will not make such a big difference. The stimulus is not going to bring us out. Period. Quote me on it. Sure it'll help, but the survival of America sure doesn't depend on it.
California's legislative issues are much closer to the precipice and also much more tied up. For four months they haven't figured out what to do. Though they are close. But this is precisely what our Founding Fathers, the men we celebrate today, had in mind.
Why do you think they created "separation of powers" between the three branches of government? Or the delegation of authority between states and the Federal government? It surely wasn't to speed things up. The framers of the Constitution were afraid of the abuses they had just escaped with their Revolution a decade earlier. So they purposely pitted the government against itself in order to slow it down, make it inefficient, and thus make it harder for the government to become despotic.
This doesn't mean it can't and won't become despotic. Witness the Alien and Sedition Acts, slavery, Jim Crow, our domestic Holocaust, Californian eugenics, and torture under Bush. That's what happens when the American public and press sits on its hands and relies on the well-meaning of our officials.
California's budget problem is not a constitutional crisis. It's a byproduct of comfortable elected officials (redistricting), a result of the global economic recession, and the legacy of our Founding Fathers.
So you are saying that things go to shit in a democracy...sounds about right. Although the very economy our nation is based off contradicts democracy itself, maybe that could be the cause of the economic crisis? I think you're right though, we can't rely on the the good-nature of ruling parties. I wish I had more to say, since this is the closest we've had to a discussion in probably years now, but it's hard to disagree with out going on a tangent/rant.
ReplyDeleteHaha, well the comment box is for rants though. Seriously though, basically things go to shit and our democracy is designed so that when that happens, we don't immediately lapse into dictatorship.
ReplyDelete