Friday, September 15, 2006

“The New Patriotism”


DEMOCRATIC IDEAS, XII: FOCUSING ON THE CONSTITUTION”


by Steven Jonas, MD, MPH

9/15/06

The Political Junkies

George Bush is the worst President the United States has ever had. Notice that I did not use the word “arguably.” He simply is. For one reason. He is the first President ever to have as his primary goal the destruction of the Constitutional, Democratic, system under which he took power (notice that I did not say “elected”). This is for him the absolutely primary goal. For the nation as a whole it would obviously be an unmitigated disaster. It stands above even those of: further entrenching the power of the extractive industries and further securing their dominance over U.S. economic and environmental policy; reducing the functions of the government other than those of repression at home and military expansion abroad, to the barest minimums; and filling the pockets of his rich supporters at the expense of the public treasury.

There have been, to be sure, other bad Presidents. Millard Fillmore, Franklin Pierce, and James Buchanan essentially stood by as the nation slid towards civil war. Andrew Johnson established the basis for what became the South’s long-term victory in that Civil War in every element other than preserving the legal institution of slavery (see my column, “How the South Won the (1st US) Civil War,” Sunday, November 06, 2005, at http://www.planetarymovement.org/ [archive] ).

Some of those bad Presidencies shared major characteristics with that of the Second Bush. Ulysses S. Grant (a predecessor who was drunk in office), Warren G. Harding, and Ronald Reagan presided over Administrations rife with corruption. James Polk and Lyndon Johnson essentially lied our country into foreign wars aimed at, in the first case, gaining large swatches of the territory of another county, and in the second preventing the establishment, through the Democratic process, of a system of government in another country that ours did not approve of. Herbert Hoover was incompetent when it came to dealing with major economic and natural disasters, and had a strong predilection for favoring the rich. Nixon was paranoid; Clinton was personally irresponsible, and so on and so forth. But none of them set out to destroy US Constitutional Democracy and replace it with a Dictatorship (otherwise known as the “Unitary Executive”).

Let me make it clear that we are not talking about substantive, individual governmental policies here. Bush’s differ in no essential ways from those of most of his Republican predecessors since Lincoln except in matters of degree. He is the first Republican President in modern times to have a Republican Congress, and a very pliable as well as unified one at that, at his disposal. Thus he has been able to implement polices that his two immediate Republican predecessors, Reagan and his father, could only dream of doing.

In terms of Bush’s Republican predecessors since the New Deal, one should note that Eisenhower might have trouble getting DLC support for the Democratic Presidential nomination because he was a firm believer in the New Deal, with certain modifications, and Nixon was a bundle of contradictions. Yes, the old McCarthyite liked using government agencies to spy on his political enemies, kept the war on Vietnam going for a totally unnecessary additional four years, and introduced racism to the Republican Party. But he also fully supported the development of our modern system of environmental regulation and protection that the Georgites are determined to dismantle, in the Spring of 1973 introduced a national health plan to the Congress that had much in common with the Clinton Health Plan of 1993, created the “opening to China,” and led the “Second Détente” with the Soviet Union.

In terms of particular foreign and domestic policies, Bush has simply been following the line laid down by Goldwater, Reagan and his father, as noted above. Except for one significant element, those policies are really nothing new in the Republican playbook. That one element is, of course, the prominence given by this Administration to the Christian Right and their policies in the social realm that it would like to implement. For the top Republican policy-makers, in the current era led by Cheney and Rove, as is well known it is not that they like the Christian Fundamentalist content so much, but that their rock-solid voting base of support for the ultra-corporatist Republican line is to be found in the Christian Right. Otherwise on policy and the differences now versus what Goldwater would have done if he had become President and what Reagan and Bush I did do to some extent, and would have done to a much greater extent except for the Congress, it is just that Bush is getting to implement them.

What is totally different, totally new, is the assault on Constitutional Democracy. I have illustrated this assault, I have been writing about it in this space, from the last three columns on “Let’s Hear it For Strict Constructionism” all the way back to my second TPJ column ever, that appeared on March 4, 2004. That one was “A Firebell in the Night,” my first effort in the discussion of the so-called “Gay Marriage Amendment” (a subject that I revisited this year on April 2 and 9, that is more accurately termed “The Homosexual Discrimination Amendment”).

And so under Bush we have, in brief, his declaration that we “at war” when under the Constitution only the Congress can declare war; the so-called “Signing Statements” under which Bush arrogates to himself the supposed authority to ignore Congressional legislation at will; the claim that he can ignore international law to which the US has ascribed by treaty, when ratified treaties are, under the Constitution, part of it; that he can ignore provisions of the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and 14th amendments at his pleasure. And so on and so forth.

In understanding what is going on here, what I have termed a “coup d’etat in slow motion,” it is vital to note that so many major Georgite policy moves are taken not so much on the substance but in an attempt to establish a precedent unchallenged for establishing a dictatorship. Do you think that Bush (well, maybe not Bush, even when he is sober which seems to be less and less frequently these days) and his policy-makers don’t know that the FISA requires warrants, that under it warrants were virtually never denied, and that the national security apparatus would function just fine, thank you very much, should they be complying with the law on wiretapping? Of course they do. It ain’t about warrantless wiretapping, folks. It is about unfettered Presidential power to do what he wants to do when he wants to do it, without any interference or even comment from either of the other two branches of the government. The “I will ignore the Fourth Amendment in relation to Guantanamo,” “I will ignore the anti-torture law,” the obvious policy of “if I decide [and after all, I am the Decider] to launch a war on Iran I will just go ahead and do it,” are all first and foremost about establishing the Georgite Dictatorship (oh sorry, “Unitary Executive”), than about the specific policy.

The lessons for the Democrats here? First, to now focus on Constitutional Democracy, its preservation and promotion could very well be the “Big Idea” that they supposedly have been looking for, for the last thirty years. (In fairness, the DLC isn’t looking for this one or any other Big Idea. Their latest tack is to run against Wal-Mart rather than against Bush and the Republicans even though there is nothing the Constitution that says that a corporation, no matter how big it is, can run either for Congress or the Presidency. But I am talking about and to Real Democrats, not Georgite Collaborationists.) Properly formulated (“framed” is the current jargon), a fairly easy job to do beginning with slogans like “The New Patriotism,” organizing around the preservation of Constitutional Democracy as the primary political objective could quickly become a very powerful political weapon. But even more important than that: if we don’t do it and don’t do it soon, we will not see another chance to do it until the task becomes, somewhere way down the Road of History, the Restoration rather than the Preservation, of Constitutional Democracy. And so, the primary reason to take this up as the rallying cry and the battle of the Democratic Party is the salvation of the nation.

Are there other major issues? Of course there are, the War on Iraq being the prime one. Then there are the monstrous tax-giveaways in the form of the rapidly and monstrously increasing national debt, the foreign debt, the criminal energy policy, the unprecedented (and in the light of Grant, Harding, Reagan, et al that’s a pretty strong word) corruption, the evermore sophisticated tools, plans, and campaigns for stealing elections, and so on and so forth. But they all have to be seen and presented, should be seen and presented, can easily be seen and presented in the context of the counter-assault that absolutely must be launched and launched soon against the Georgite assault on US Constitutional Democracy that has been underway since they took office on January 20, 2001. Mark my words, folks. There is not too much time left. The Democratic Party simply must get moving, before it is too late.

As I noted at the end of my last column in this space: “As my good friend Jack Dalton said some time back: ‘ Was it not George W. Bush who stated 5 years ago, “…this would be much easier if this were a dictatorship, as long as I was the dictator?” Was it not George W. Bush who was quoted recently [as] stating, “The Constitution is just a goddamn piece of paper?“ ’ (Jack's Straight-Speak 1-2-06, http://jack-dalton.blogspot.com/).”

Dr. Steven Jonas is a contributing author for The Political Junkies (www.thepoliticaljunkies.net). He is a Professor of Preventive Medicine at Stony Brook University (NY) and author/co-author of over twenty books. Dr. Jonas is one of America's most perceptive Democratic political analysts. In his book The New Americanism, Dr. Jonas presents his proposal for that “new vision and mission” for the Democratic Party that so many, for so many years, have been urging it to find. A new vision and mission are obviously needed with increasing urgency as with increasing speed and determination the Georgites drive our nation towards frank theocratic fascism. Dr. Jonas finds the needed vision and mission in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. "The New Americanism: How the Democratic Party Can Win the Presidency is available from Amazon.com (go to "Books;" enter the title) and BarnesandNoble.com (same).

He is also the author of The 15% Solution: A Political History of American Fascism, 2001-2022. Under the pseudonym "Jonathan Westminster" this book was originally published in 1996. It was republished with a New Introduction in 2004. Under Georgite rule, the “fictional non-fiction” scenario of this work of “future history” is, most unfortunately, becoming all too real, now almost day-by-day. The 2004 edition is available at www.barnesandnoble.com (search with the book title) and www.xlibris.com (click on “Bookstore,” then “Search” with the title). Both versions are available at www.amazon.com (go to "Books;" search with the title).

Dr. Jonas is also a Contributing Editor for the Weblog http://planetarymovement.org/blog/, produced by The Planetary Movement Ltd. UK (http://planetarymovement.org/blog/), TPJ's own Michael Carmichael, President and Chief Executive Officer, a Contributing Columnist for the Project for the Old American Century, POAC (http://www.oldamericancentury.org/), on which his TPJ columns appear regularly, and a Columnist for the webmagazine BuzzFlash (http://www.buzzflash.com/) on which short(er) articles are published once a week or so. By invitation, Dr. J's TPJ columns are also posted periodically on the weblog Thomas Paine's Corner (http://civillibertarian.blogspot.com/).

12 comments:

SheaNC said...

Well done. What more can be said? Bush is repugnant... or, it is "repubnant"?

Anonymous said...

We must review this administration's actions:
Guilty of violating the 1st Amendment by detaining protestors in cages, banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon and firing BYU physics professor Stephen Jones (because he concluded that explosives brought down WTC);
Guilty of violating the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns from law-abiding citizens during Katrina;
Guilty of violating the 4th Amendment by illegal wire-taps;
Guilty of violating the 5th Amendment by using 'secret' witnesses and evidence;
Guilty of violating the 8th Amendment by employing torture;
Guilty of violating the entire Constitution by starting 2 illegal wars based on KNOWN lies.
Support indy media, last link (before Google Books caves to pressure and drops the title):
America Deceived (Book)

Freeman said...

I would respectfully disagree, after many years of research, I would say that Lincoln was the worst, he and the Congress controlled by the north destroyed the republic. You will not read about this in your government school history books. Andrew Johnson wanted to end the war, and stop the overthrow, the civil war first was not a civil war, a civil war would have had to have been internal to the nation/states. It was an international war between to groups of nation/states, remember a federated republic is what the founders established, read law of nations. Also read what Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler said about him. Then FDR, and then Bush I and Bush II. There is a lot of competition though because there were very few good ones.

Also read The Real Lincoln, by Thomas DiLorenzo. I also have a friend who did a lot of in depth research, he read every newspaper archived from the civil war period, you will get a totally different story then the revised one that is taught, remember the victors also write the history, to their benefit of course.

Bush certainly in these modern times is a terrible president, and a war criminal, and a profiteer.

Peace

Anonymous said...

The entire comment if indicating the South won the "civil war" is 100% erroneous because it was never a "civil war" but a pre-emptive political war by Bushs alltime hero Lincoln whom he has emulated in every respect.

Mayeb the British should call the 1776 war a civil war? Brits certainly called them "rebels" not "patriots" altohugh revisionists have always labeled the South as "rebels".

What were they rebelling from since afterall it was the South where America was founded settled and southerners who wrote all the founding documents.

Wasnt the South therefore seceeding from its own creation?

Jefferson Madison and Washington were all southerners.

The north was founded only when the Pilgrims heading for the south blew off course and landed on Plymouth Rock even calling ir Northern Virginia.

Lets set this entire story striaght once and for all. There NEVER was a civil war because there were 2 nations not 1 and the South who created founded and wrote all the original documents had broke away from their own creation doing so legally in Congress in the Washington, named for southerner George the 1st president and "father of our nation".

What you had was an illegal pre-emptive war based on later lies as Lincoln in 1863 used the slavery issue to justify his killing of 100s of 1000s of men from both nations.


Technically had the South won and French helped as they did in 1776, then the Real America of the South would have dissolved the Marxist corrupt imposer North and imposter corrupt liar Marxist Lincoln who would have been tried and hanged with his generals, and incorporated it into the South and regain its former capital Washington.

All slaves would have been liberated and shipped back to their roots in Africa where they would have been better off rather than remain in a white western race society to degrade into welfare status.

Southern America would have prevented the Marxist Bolshevik War and both world wars plus the 2nd civil war in the 60s and Israel never would have been stolen from Palestine.

The world would be at peace and never would a carpetbagger like Bush be in power as neo-royalty kings.

Anonymous said...

While chimpy is bad, even worse is his base of core supporters and those that enable his treason, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.

Alfred Holden said...

The United States has been under Maritime Law since Abraham Lincoln abrogated the Constitution and established the first Yankee dictatorship. Since Lincoln the US has witnessed several major goeological shifts politically. To state that Bush Jr is the worst president only underscores by way of distraction the condition of the Republic, its primary causes of descent towards Social Democracy and executive licentiousness, and removes the essential understandings necessary in any historical critique when discussing the changes of our union.

With due respect, Dr. Jonas cleverly disguised rhetoric is a move to build a broader concensus towards installing a Democratic platform and candidacy. In no certain respect has he addressed the changes in governance and adherence to the rule of law that is attributable to both major parties.

Our political process is morally, politically, and spiritually bankrupt. We no longer have a representative working government in place. The corruption we see is in both major parties, in every state, in every county and in every corner of our society. Dr. Jonas' readings of his charges against this administration will not changes this fact.

Changes must occur at the individual level, through personal transformation and through personal salvation. To attempt to utilize ad hominems, missing the point, hasty generalizations and circular reasonings in an attempt to disparage Republicans but not Democrats is disingenuous and rife with deceitful reasonings.

Credibility is not in the degree or pedigree but in the person who bares a reasoned conscience and a profound understanding of oneself, one's relationship to others and one's behavior to the surrounding environment we find ourselves in.

Anonymous said...

All I have to say is:

George W. Bush is a High Traitor and MUST be charged with HIGH TREASON

Wayne said...

You moron! Bottom line is this screwball,they want us dead(most of the muslim faith)dip shit! Who do you want to fight or lead the battle against these extremist? Ms Clinton! You can blame the media for tying our militaries hands in the fight against them, you think we can't end it real quick? We can! and bring our troops home quick,better to support him than live with a rag on your pin head!

Anonymous said...

I see the last post is a bit of a 'tard when faced with the facts...

I have like others begun to see that we cannot even if we swung the New Labour and Republicans out of power, reclaim what has been lost because historically very rarely do politicians remove previous administrations major policies but seek to usurp them and absorb them within the few years in power.

A lot of people are clinging on to the hope that November will be a "magic potion" to cure all their evils but Clinton is corrupt protecting Hilary from massive tax frauds, Gore is probably the best of the bunch but as we saw with Lamont, as soon as it was seen he was entering into the race as a leader, the Israeli lobby gathered him in and to be honest between the Israeli's "elite" and Bush's lot, America is not going to be free any time soon.

The previous poster is an example of what we have to overcome, not to capture the swing but to reach into every person and convince them of the bad things happening.

Any person that has been to the Middle East will tell you that the Muslim is actually the same as us with a fundamental ideology, you cross a Muslim and yes he will fight you and to be honest I think the Muslims have got a right to be angered at the way they have been treated by the West.

There are alternatives, passive rebellion of course was a winner for Ghandi (but unreported the 2.5 million Muslims that died in partioning India) and of course taking the next yet more dangerous step of pushing back the way our forebears did.

When millions march in protest against their doings, and they do not even bat an eyelid or change one aspect of what they are doing, when we cannot get corruption and war crimes indicted, when the system fails as it is failing now, we have to stop trying to make a broken thing work.

Mexico is an inspiration in my mind, an alternative democracy, a novel idea but failing that, as people will find out in November and further on when someone like Hilary Clinton gets into power (don't forget she is listed by Haaretz as VERY Israel friendly) what will you do then?

Options are running out as quickly as time and maybe if the whackjob who previously posted learned a thing or two and devoted that raw anger and energy to fighting the real enemy, not a phantom in the desert, we would see a change in their stance.

Ancient One
http://ancient-one.myblogvoice.com/

Anonymous said...

What better way to bring the US to it's knees, but have a "puppet president" who is laughed and ridicule for his ludicrous demands for world peace via the route of "indirect acts" of terrorism as a weapon of fear.

Sam Houston said...

The primary concern in our country today should be to ensure the safety of our citizens. Thats the only reason for a Federal Government. Bush bashing and "The New Patriotism" do nothing to provide America with security. The only reason I will vote Republican in Nov. is terrorism. Islam declared war on America in 1993 7 years before George Bush was elected. Reality is hard and cold. Seek the truth and avoid the rhetoric.

Tabby said...

dear sir who wrote this,
I may be only fifteen but one thing I know is that you definatly could not be president. President Bush only does what the CONSTITUION STATES! He is DEFENDING FREEDOM in IRAQ! How do you think you would deal with the pressure of leading a nation knowing that out there, there is probably about 2 million people or actually way more who hate you and want you impeached? You most likely go mad. And yes i must admit President Bush has made some mistakes, but you know what, we are human and last time I checked he was human as well. What do humans do????? They make mistakes. So shut your mouth about things that you shouldn't even be talking about in the first place. I have been to africa and Europe on missinos trips. You cannot even begin to believe how much they love and appreciate George Bush. Yet you sit here and complain about him. Now tell me after reading this, who is the child now?

sincerly-
Tabby