Friday
Jan132017
Friday, January 13, 2017 at 11:41AM
Update: Jan 13, 5:51 p.m.
A Warning (see below) from Bill Moyers!
He is right - there is nothing inevitable about democracy being immune to the authoritarian impulse. Any reader of Plato's Republic knows that!
Other Brits have diagnosed the arrogance of power that corrodes democracy - Edmund Burke, Aldous Huxley, George Orwell and another political scientist of Runciman's generation Bernard Crick author of 'In Defense of Politics.'
Moyer's doesn't take into account that The Donald as POTUS will live under the restraints of our checks and balances system, something he has no experience with - yet.
And thanks to frequent elections, the restraining power of the electorate will be felt by him at some point - hopefully sooner than later. Another restraint on him will be from the political class itself when he turns on his own kind as he no doubt will.
The 40% that support Trump is not the majority - not even close to it given the whole of the electorate - including the 43% who seldom vote along with those misguided millennials and suburban women in key states like Pennsylvania who sat this one out.
By 2018 or 2020 one hopes feeling buyer's remorse these voters will have learned the lesson. At best Trump's base is @ 25% of eligible voters a highly volatile base.
But the most hopeful fact is that Donald Trump is supremely arrogant and ignorant. That combination makes him impeachment fodder already. It's just a matter of time.... tick, tick, tick... His supplicants and minions can't save him from himself...
The modern presidency has morphed into what some scholars refer to as the Plebiscitary presidency. The president has taken on a symbolic role as the embodiment of “the” public in the old Roman sense of the tribune of the people.
With 40% of the public on each side of the political divide bunkered in - elections have increasingly been not a civil dialogue but a zero sum game between the deaf on both sides, especially over abortion rights.
The role of social media and 24/7 public opinion polling has accelerated this phenomenon - the politics of the deaf. Or is this election the last gasp of a dying demographic - the Rust belt white vote who see Trump as the "great White hope?"
But it is obvious that American politics has entered a new age, a verbal civil war waged on talk show radio and social media where two irreconciliable forces face each other. The result is that polarization will continue from election to election.
The solution for progressives is not to repeat the errors of the Clinton campaign and her supporters by taking victory for granted. One must have a 50 state not just a "battle ground" state strategy.
Some will argue Donald Trump will be our first unabashed “plebiscitary” president. But this is clearly not true. He may be the most flamboyant and inflammatory example of such a president, time will tell.
But this tendency for the public and the Congress to create a cult of adulation around the presidency began with President Washington who thankfully put an end to making him “king-like” by only running for two terms.
One is still looking for the president-elect to show Washington like restraint. One saw none of it in his "press" conference on Wednesday.
Other presidents who have fit into this model have been extremely popular while seriously flawed – Andrew Jackson comes to mind. Lincoln ascended to this position more after his assassination than before since he died a martyr.
More recent presidents such as FDR and Eisenhower evoked this tribune of the people mantle without necessarily trying to milk it for all it was worth. FDR faced major opposition as did IKE but both were extremely popular with their bases.
FDR used his popularity to advance the New Deal, IKE preferring a more behind the scenes route in advocating policy and in his farewell address warned Americans about the rise of the unchecked power of the military-industrial complex.
But the concept of a Plebiscitary presidency is well within the nature of an office where the incumbent is the chief legislator, the head of state and party leader. But most presidents have realized their powers are limited to the power to persuade.
Our system of checks and balances, of limited government that disperses shared power from federal, state and local government does not give the president no matter how popular the power to rule by fiat.
But clearly given Trump’s over the top ego and his penchant for “straight but vulgar” talk will test how far he is allowed to go.
We will soon find out whether the president-elect understands his role within our constitutional system or seeks ways to flaunt it as other presidents have by taking on the mantel of an imperial presidency – LBJ, Nixon, Reagan and Bush II.
The temptations to do so are inviting given social media and when one’s party controls the legislative branch and 33 state governments – it’s hard to not overreach falling into an Oedipus Rex complex eventually destroying their presidencies.
Presidential power according to Richard Neustadt hinges on the ability to persuade using his “power stakes” where various “publics” are watching the POTUS – the American public, media, Congress, Courts, private sector and foreign governments.
Stay tuned, the plot thickens!
Reader Comments (2)
What makes these people any less important than liberal progressives in big cities? This post talks about arrogance. Is it not arrogant to assume you're smarter and better able to decide who should be President than a very sizable portion of the country?
It is that arrogance and self righteousness that lost this election. Until you progressives figure that out and show a little humility, those people you consider deplorable and uneducated will continue to look past you. Then there is the pettiness and infantile rants about "not my President" and trying to paint him as illegitimate for whatever reason might stick. The threatening to boycott anyone that goes to visit with Trump rather than holding out hope that him bringing in a diverse group of people to listen to might help shape his policies in ways that you might actually be happy about. While the progressive echo chamber might be feeling all good about itself, what you're not noticing is that even people a little left of center are getting extremely turned off by the nonsense and childish tantrums.
A large block of people don't want the government looking out for them. They want opportunity and freedom to have the dignity of providing for themselves. I often hear the argument that these people are voting against their own interests. They're not. While the left might believe the best interests of rural America is social programs to take care of them. These people have pride and would rather have jobs and care for themselves. Many are unemployed because liberal policy destroyed their jobs. Look at rural Oregon where the timber industry was decimated by misguided environmentalists. Most don't want to destroy the ecosystem, but they prefer common sense protections that provide balance between human needs and the environment. Not the all or nothing approach extreme environmentalists call for and lemming big city progressives happily vote for. Often found to be bad choices a decade later.