Yesterday I wrote about the folly of the current administrative state model. Being a government by, of, and for the Gentry it cannot know what the ordinary Commoner wants. And, blithely ignoring the world view of Commoners, one day it wakes up and gets Trump.
But now I want to look at the other problem. It is the reason why we have rules of procedure, "due process," and laws in the first place. And how our Gentry and the administrative state that it inhabits has been ignoring this notion.
Again, returning to yesterday's piece, I argued that the whole point of politics is to avoid civil war.
Obviously, what governments have done since time out of mind is to bend the rules and even break them for reasons of state. Or raisons d'état as you you would say if you were French. And they invented the administrative state.
The reason that governments do this is to protect their power, to squelch rude underlings that are threatening its power and its continuance. And that is, rather obviously, what the Deep State has been doing ever since 2015. (Never mind what went on previously).
For instance, it is pretty obvious that in 2015-16 somebody decided they wanted to spy on the Trump campaign, for reasons of state. The means obtained to do this was to get the FISA court to approve surveillance of Carter Page as a possible spy for the Russians. Only, it turned out that Page was already a CIA asset! And some FBI operative failed to note that in the FISA court application for surveillance.
Hello! Can you spell breaking the rules, Deep State?
Then there was the applications to the FISA court that failed to mention that the Steele Dossier -- that accused Trump of various offences -- was mostly uncorroborated.
Hello! Can you spell breaking the rules, Deep State?
Then there was the leaking by FBI/DOJ officials of stuff about the Steele Dossier to the media in the fall of 2016.
Hello! Can you spell breaking the rules, Deep State?
Then there was FBI Director's cutesy meeting with Donald Trump that he used as a pretext to get a Special Counsel investigation of the president.
Hello! Can you spell breaking the rules, Deep State?
Then there was the packing of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team with Democrat partisan operatives.
Hello! Can you spell breaking the rules, Deep State?
Then there was the FBI entrapment of Gen. Michael Flynn, whose main crime was disagreeing with Obama administration strategy in the Middle East. And then alteration of documents.
Hello! Can you spell breaking the rules, Deep State?
Then there was the Special Counsel's report that reported no Russian collusion but couldn't say whether the president obstructed its investigation.
Hello! Can you spell breaking the rules, Deep State?
Then there was the changing of the rules for whistlblowers coincident with whistleblower Eric Ciaramella deciding to report Trumpian Ukraine skullduggery that he only heard second-hand. (Hey, Google, how come that your Search doesn't autocomplete when I get to "whistleblower eric c"? Cat got your lefty tongue?)
Hello! Can you spell breaking the rules, Deep State?
And never mind about Nancy Pelosi's derisive impeachment investigations in the depths of the basement run by the Intelligence Committee instead of the judiciary, and the whole laughable delay over transmitting the articles of impeachment.
My point is that the way we avoid civil war is not merely by following the rules, but by being seen to follow the rules. As in Caesar's Wife.
Because if you are a stickler for following the rules it makes it much more difficult for your political opponents to paint you as scoundrels, and it makes it much more difficult for revolutionaries to get up a head of rebellion.
The problem is, of course, in any political context, whether at the local non-profit or in the United States House of Representatives, there is always a temptation to use your power, whatever it is, to slide around the rules to get your way.
But the problem with breaking the rules is that it encourages people to say, with Shakespeare's Casca: "speak, hands for me."
And, I think, breaking the rules is the tactic of weaklings. The manly thing to do is to follow the rules, and accept the result like a man. But the cowardly thing to do is to sneak around the rules, to avoid embarrassment and reversal.
And the truth is that the Deep State is composed of late-dynasty weaklings, scions that have got their positions because of Daddy or Mommy or connections begun at some selective college, or having the right opinions. They are like the inheritors of a thriving corporation that don't really know how and why the corporation flourished, and how to redirect it in a changed world. And when things go wrong they start to cheat.
Yeah, that is the foundation of most financial scandal. A bet goes wrong, and the executives try to hide the losses, and make it all back on the next play. Only that one fails too. And so on.
I suppose we should all be glad, because the Deep State shenanigans show the weakness of the late-stage administrative-state dynasty. It shows that the dynasty is losing the Mandate of Heaven. But late dynasties are always full of fools and knaves.
Only, my hope is that we can go through a Time of Troubles and get to the next dynasty without an open civil war.
Hey, I guess I'm an optimist!
But now I want to look at the other problem. It is the reason why we have rules of procedure, "due process," and laws in the first place. And how our Gentry and the administrative state that it inhabits has been ignoring this notion.
Again, returning to yesterday's piece, I argued that the whole point of politics is to avoid civil war.
The whole apparatus of elections, of separation of powers, of throwing the rascals out is so that the overwhelming majority of people are content enough with things as they are that they do not feel that a head of rebellion is required to defend themselves from a tyrannical government.But there is another angle: having a government that is seen to obey the laws and the rules of "due process."
Obviously, what governments have done since time out of mind is to bend the rules and even break them for reasons of state. Or raisons d'état as you you would say if you were French. And they invented the administrative state.
The reason that governments do this is to protect their power, to squelch rude underlings that are threatening its power and its continuance. And that is, rather obviously, what the Deep State has been doing ever since 2015. (Never mind what went on previously).
For instance, it is pretty obvious that in 2015-16 somebody decided they wanted to spy on the Trump campaign, for reasons of state. The means obtained to do this was to get the FISA court to approve surveillance of Carter Page as a possible spy for the Russians. Only, it turned out that Page was already a CIA asset! And some FBI operative failed to note that in the FISA court application for surveillance.
Hello! Can you spell breaking the rules, Deep State?
Then there was the applications to the FISA court that failed to mention that the Steele Dossier -- that accused Trump of various offences -- was mostly uncorroborated.
Hello! Can you spell breaking the rules, Deep State?
Then there was the leaking by FBI/DOJ officials of stuff about the Steele Dossier to the media in the fall of 2016.
Hello! Can you spell breaking the rules, Deep State?
Then there was FBI Director's cutesy meeting with Donald Trump that he used as a pretext to get a Special Counsel investigation of the president.
Hello! Can you spell breaking the rules, Deep State?
Then there was the packing of Special Counsel Robert Mueller's team with Democrat partisan operatives.
Hello! Can you spell breaking the rules, Deep State?
Then there was the FBI entrapment of Gen. Michael Flynn, whose main crime was disagreeing with Obama administration strategy in the Middle East. And then alteration of documents.
Hello! Can you spell breaking the rules, Deep State?
Then there was the Special Counsel's report that reported no Russian collusion but couldn't say whether the president obstructed its investigation.
Hello! Can you spell breaking the rules, Deep State?
Then there was the changing of the rules for whistlblowers coincident with whistleblower Eric Ciaramella deciding to report Trumpian Ukraine skullduggery that he only heard second-hand. (Hey, Google, how come that your Search doesn't autocomplete when I get to "whistleblower eric c"? Cat got your lefty tongue?)
Hello! Can you spell breaking the rules, Deep State?
And never mind about Nancy Pelosi's derisive impeachment investigations in the depths of the basement run by the Intelligence Committee instead of the judiciary, and the whole laughable delay over transmitting the articles of impeachment.
My point is that the way we avoid civil war is not merely by following the rules, but by being seen to follow the rules. As in Caesar's Wife.
Because if you are a stickler for following the rules it makes it much more difficult for your political opponents to paint you as scoundrels, and it makes it much more difficult for revolutionaries to get up a head of rebellion.
The problem is, of course, in any political context, whether at the local non-profit or in the United States House of Representatives, there is always a temptation to use your power, whatever it is, to slide around the rules to get your way.
But the problem with breaking the rules is that it encourages people to say, with Shakespeare's Casca: "speak, hands for me."
And, I think, breaking the rules is the tactic of weaklings. The manly thing to do is to follow the rules, and accept the result like a man. But the cowardly thing to do is to sneak around the rules, to avoid embarrassment and reversal.
And the truth is that the Deep State is composed of late-dynasty weaklings, scions that have got their positions because of Daddy or Mommy or connections begun at some selective college, or having the right opinions. They are like the inheritors of a thriving corporation that don't really know how and why the corporation flourished, and how to redirect it in a changed world. And when things go wrong they start to cheat.
Yeah, that is the foundation of most financial scandal. A bet goes wrong, and the executives try to hide the losses, and make it all back on the next play. Only that one fails too. And so on.
I suppose we should all be glad, because the Deep State shenanigans show the weakness of the late-stage administrative-state dynasty. It shows that the dynasty is losing the Mandate of Heaven. But late dynasties are always full of fools and knaves.
Only, my hope is that we can go through a Time of Troubles and get to the next dynasty without an open civil war.
Hey, I guess I'm an optimist!
No comments:
Post a Comment