Alternative Oversight - A Satire (sort of...)

Alternative Oversight - A Satire (Sort of...)
by Br. Karekin M Yarian, BSG
punkmonksf@gmail.com

The reason being an American is worth bothering with, is because America has tried to find a way of being a country that is neither tightly centralized nor just a loose federation of essentially independent states - a country that is seeking to be a coherent family of communities hoping to discover the common good for all citizens, and to celebrate unity in the future vision of an international community of nations. That, is what the word America means for its citizens, and it is a vision that has taken clearer shape in many of our historical domestic and international dialogues.

By the latest actions of our recent US Congress, the constitutional basis of this country's governance has not just been impaired but broken. The Congress has broken the American vision by refusing to exercise oversight of the Executive and by encouraging violations of the Constitutional separation of powers. It abrogated its responsibilities by failing to reign in a Chief Executive whose disregard of the Constitution cannot be accepted by many Americans, [including many of those in San Francisco], nor by the majority of world wide nations, nor by our chief allies – the functional democracies of Europe and Asia.

Both aspects, this impaired governance and broken international relations, are embodied in our current President. By his actions as President and Chief Executive, in his statements during previous State of the Union addresses, and in his most recent speech in defense of a failed war strategy, he has made it pointedly clear that he intends to pursue an agenda that patently ignores the Constitution, is contrary to its plain teaching regarding habeas corpus, and affronts this nation's doctrine of separation of powers by turning our Constitution into a "goddamned piece of paper�

As a President whose authority several of us in the United States and throughout the world cannot accept, he breaks the unity of the American republic which he is supposed to represent and has destroyed the bipartisan cooperation of a two-party system essential for the unity of any particular community of Americans. In spite of his election as President of the United States, he cannot be Chief Executive to those who believe he is neither obedient to the Constitution nor an effective leader in international relations. For those Americans some sort of alternative arrangement is now necessary.

A collection of American citizens in local communities will now plan to appeal to the Secretary General of the United Nations for “alternative presidential oversight and care.� As of now at least five local communities across the nation have chosen to follow suit. These appeals in no way affect our citizenship in the United States, but simply recognize that someone who is instrumental in breaking the democratic processes of the republic, both constitutionally and politically, cannot be our chief executive. We therefore have to look elsewhere.

Alternative presidential oversight and care will not affect our legal relationship to the rest of the United States nor the juridical authority of its future President as granted him by our constitution and laws. But it will enable those citizens who uphold the constitutional and political understanding of the American nation to appeal to a designated President or Chief Executive in sympathy with their position on moral guidance and leadership in domestic and international issues. Also, through alternative presidential oversight, the relationship between a particular citizen and his sense of participation in the rest of the American society will be enhanced and solidified.

Finally, it is hoped that individuals and communities in unsympathetic regions may also benefit from alternative presidential oversight by affiliating with those communities where such oversight has been granted.

0
Your rating: None

Comments

Looking for leadership elsewhere

Kety's picture

Steve, you make several good points.

However, I think that the symbolic gesture of looking for leadership elsewhere is an interesting and powerful one.

Some advocate for that through impeachment. Punkmonk proposes an interesting alternative...

Punkmonk- how do you see that playing out in the day to day?

Remember the satire

Hi guys:

This is more a commentary on the silliness of Episcopalians seeking alternative primatial oversight than it is on the reality of alternative presidential oversight. It is a commentary on sectarianism that, if translated to politics, seems so over the top that it would make one laugh at the sheer audacity of it.

When we sign on to a form of government... whether of religious or political authority, we agree to fight for change within the system rather than walk away from it. How long will it be before someone has the audacity to suggest exactly what I satirize in the article? How long then until the systems we build up can no longer be sustained because of factionalism and division?

Satire

Stephen Rockwell's picture

Punkmonk...thanks for breaking it down for me. I now see the Episcopalian commentary. Being an Episcopalian, I have often wondered about how much time is dedicated to political debate within the various structures of the church. The church is looking inward with hints of schism even as its numbers dwindle. Many Episcopal churches need a renewal from the dry sermons, safe political positions, and drabness of the service. There's much to be said for the Eucharist, but more innovative worship and a real prophetic voice would do well to develop the type of spiritual transformation for which people are desperately looking.

Global government?

Stephen Rockwell's picture

Br. Karekin,

First let me say, I completely agree with the premise that the Congress has not exercised the oversight capacity required for an effective balancing of the federal government that were intended by the founders. Indeed, the Jeffersonians were quite adamant that the legislative branch would be the dominant branch as the representative branch of the people. This Congress has abdicated responsiblity in even a Hamiltonian strong executive worldview. The number of hearings annual given year has dropped from the 70s to the 80s and 90s and even more precipitiously in this decade. Clearly, the Congress is not living up to its Constitutional responsibilities.

While the idea of a global government sounds intriguing, I would be hesitant to pursue the United Nations idea for a number of reasons:
1. Our federal system ensures that power not articulated in the federal government rests with the states. This localizing of power is extremely important. Indeed, on issues such as climate change the states are acting while the federal government does nothing. As progressives we should look to localizing democracy.

2. The UN is not a democracy and the Secretary-General is not elected by the population of the world. I would not rely view that position as a legitimate authority to monitor our government.

3. Beyong legitimacy are issues of capacity. The UN has not proven itself to be an effective, responsive body on a whole host of issues. Granted, the UN is often handicapped by certain members of the Security Council who don't want to play, but in many ways the UN is a large bureaucracy that is often ineffective and sometimes corrupt.

That being said, I believe the United States needs to be more supportive of the UN as a means to resolve conflicts between states and to be more responsive of international law. There is a question for example around when we torture people in prisons, there should be some accountability mechanisms to the world community.

Great piece Punkmonk!

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.