Death of a Republic

Written by Andrew Baxter

There was a tear in my eye and a lump in my throat that glorious day back in the winter of 2008 when Barrack Obama won the presidency. The whole world must have let out a collective sigh of relief.

But I think that it bears repeating here that for all of the hope and talk of change that accompanied this president, he has not only failed to deliver much of anything he pledged during his presidential campaign, he has gone even further than W. in challenging the very basis of the democracy America still pretends to be. The right to habeas corpus and freedom from summary execution are even perhaps more important than freedom of speech or assembly or commerce in any system purporting to be government of and by the people.

It needs to be broadcast far and wide that the most recent president of the United States of America – no, not W but rather the much lauded Barrack Obama – has now granted himself the authority to order the extra-judicial assassinations of American citizens overseas.

It is perhaps telling of the health of popular media in the United States and a political culture so blinded from the founding principles of the freedoms and security they now enjoy that this story has not caused a revolution!

If the president has the power to do this, what is left of the democracy such a power will inevitably be justified as necessary to protect?

Tagged under

politics

Latest from Andrew Baxter

Related items

More in this category: « The Emerging Over-Hype on Emerging Markets The Raven »

Join the Discussion

Commenting Policy

Beams and Struts employs commenting guidelines that we expect all readers to bear in mind when commenting at the site. Please take a moment to read them before posting - Beams and Struts Commenting Policy

2 comments

Comment Link Sunday, 31 October 2010 00:39 posted by David
You can't imagine a scenario in which Obama's action might be the right thing to do?
Comment Link Monday, 01 November 2010 17:40 posted by Andrew
There is no question that one can always imagine some scenario in which just killing someone would be easier. I have this experience almost daily. And just as there is no doubt that there were seemingly reasonable scenarios thought up by our governments when they rounded up Japanese folks during the war, stole their property, and threw them in concentration camps, so too can I imagine why the president might want this power.

But that doesn’t make it even remotely acceptable.

The point, however, is not whether the case can be made for this unprecedented power, but what the legitimation of this power in the hands of the government means. If you can justify this power as reasonable in your own head, then I must ask you what you consider democracy to be?

The fact that my government, in any form, can’t simply arrest me, throw me in jail and execute me on a whim is the fundamental tenet on which stands our democracies. Without this core guarantee, nothing else matters. There is no freedom of speech, property rights, or free markets. There is nothing but tyranny!

Our entire system of government is predicated on accountability, on the rule of law, and possessing one person with not only the ability but the legal authority to simply order the execution of an individual, no matter who they are – and we’re not talking about just any individuals, we’re here talking about American citizens – is no different than elevating them out of that system, crowning them king.

So, I have to ask you then explain to me what then differentiates President Obama from any other crackpot dictator?

“OH!” some will shout, “that’s a ridiculous statement!”

Is it?

Where once the office of the president of the USA was differentiated from the dictatorships of the likes of Sadaam Hussein and Idi Amin in kind, it can now only be described as merely existing in degrees.