Tag: separation of powers

Categories
Accountability general freedom ideological culture moral hazard nannyism national politics & policies responsibility

Impatience as a Political Impulse

impatience, frustration, politics, radicals, balance, caution

It is not demonization to recognize a besetting sin.

Yesterday, I warned against demonization, though admittedly, I have “picked on” both Trump and Bernie here at Common Sense and in this site’s new Steal This Meme section. In my defense, to refrain from seeing only the worst in one side or the other (or both) is not to resist telling the truth about the characteristic worst aspects, right or left.

Neither the Donald nor the Bern are good party men. Trump has never been close to the GOP; Sanders has registered “independent” throughout his Senatorial career.

But Sanders is a self-​proclaimed socialist, and his support is “from the left”; Trump is vague ideologically, but his characteristic blunt pronouncements seem “right-​wingish” even if not obviously conservative.

Maybe this is all about frustration and impatience.

Socialism has long been associated with impatience at the “slow pace” of progress, as economist Yves Guyot made clear in The Tyranny of Socialism over a hundred years ago. The fact that, even in our bumbling age, all segments of society have gotten richer is not enough. More must be extracted from a few and given to the many. That is the Bern of it.

Trump’s supporters are obviously impatient with things “not getting done” in Washington, and upset that “we don’t win anymore.” But one reason things are hard to do, politically, is that limited government, a rule of law, and separation of powers makes it difficult. Cutting through the b.s. sometimes means destroying the bedrock of a free society.

That sort of “winning” would be a Pyrrhic victory.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

Printable PDF

impatience, frustration, politics, radicals, balance, caution

 

Common Sense Needs Your Help!

Please consider showing your appreciation by dropping something in our tip jar  (this link will take you to the Citizens in Charge donation page… and your contribution will go to the support of the Common Sense website). Maintaining this site takes time and money. Your help in spreading the message of common sense and liberty is very much appreciated!

 

Categories
U.S. Constitution

Meet the Moots

The meaning of institutions, like words, changes over time.

Take Congress. The Constitution hands legislative power to the two houses of Congress. With the growth of government Congress has delegated more and more of its powers to the executive branch.

In a recent column, George F. Will identified the most recent “development” of this trend. Will’s example is the automaker bailout. Congress did not authorize it: The package failed in the Senate. But President Bush simply took money from another bailout bill and dumped it at the failing automobile manufacturers.

Even if you think the bailout is good policy, the president should be censured. “With the automakers,” Will writes, “executive branch overreaching now extends to the essence of domestic policy — spending.…

George Will’s Washington Post column is titled “Making Congress Moot.” Droll, that. “Moot” is an ancient term for a deliberative body. Philologist and fantasist J.R.R. Tolkien used it to designate his congress of “treeherders.” Remember “entmoot”?

The phrase “moot point” used to mean “open to debate.” It now usually means “an issue raised whose determination cannot have any practical effect.”

Congress has gone from an august, important deliberative body — a moot — to a mere debating society. As the meaning of the word “moot” has decayed, so too has Congress.

Think of 535 moot points.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.