The Absolute Power of a Democratic ‘Trifecta’
Published in Semana
(Colombia) on 7 January 2020
by Clara López (link to original)
(Colombia) on 7 January 2020
by Clara López (link to original)
Translated from
by Tom Walker.
Edited by Arielle Eirienne.
Time after time, President Donald Trump has acted more like an absolute monarch. This absolute power of a “democratic trifecta,” in which the three branches of government are in the hands of the same party, lacks checks and balances.
Democracy is in decline, and armed conflicts are on the rise. In 2018, The Economist, one of the mainstays of liberal thought, published an essay with an invitation “… to reinvent liberalism for the 21st century.” It claims that liberalism is “under attack.” The attacks extend across the whole political spectrum, from the U.S. version that stigmatizes defending the protagonist state as leftist extremism, to the French version, which views liberalism as equivalent to the market fundamentalism of the radical right. The targets of the offensive are the liberal elites, who have been co-opted everywhere by the riches of globalization and are no longer agents of change.
The ambiguity with which those elites have taken on the excesses of free trade and the free market has turned democracy into the loser in the anti-liberal attack. The excessive concentration of wealth has contributed to the concentration of political power, to the extent that it has reinforced a crisis in political representation. The 99% do vote, but the 1% end up controlling the way the rules are arranged in their favor in the executive or legislative branches and even in the judicial branch, although to a lesser extent in the judicial brance because of its greater independence shaped over a long history.
Paul Krugman, Nobel Laureate in economics, wrote a very revealing piece in El País (Spain) about how the attack on democracy in the U.S. is being carried out. In the impeachment trial of President Trump before the Senate for serious abuse of presidential power to favor his reelection, what has been surprising is the unanimous support of members of Congress and Republican Party leaders, despite the overwhelming evidence for conviction.
Only the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, has come out against Trump, asserting that there was in fact a quid pro quo in the Ukrainian affair. Even representatives in the House who don’t have to worry about reelection because they are not running have judiciously kept silent. Not a single one of them has dared to break with party discipline; in so doing, they have turned their backs on the moral imperative to put the country ahead of political parties.
Krugman invites readers to follow the money trail. All legislators, one way or another, are dependent on the generosity of the party machine’s wealthy donors to finance their campaigns, those who resign depend on those donors to land well-paid private jobs once they leave office. The exception is Ambassador Sondland; since he is a millionaire, he doesn’t need to rely on the generosity of third parties to maintain his lifestyle. This analysis coincides with that of The Economist. The liberal establishment has gotten used to the good life, and it is not going to risk its position for a principle.
The question is: how much concentration of power can a democracy take? Fortunately, there is a new generation, and the Democratic opposition in the U.S. has been working ceaselessly on this. But more and more, the power of presidents and prime ministers is growing and becoming excessive. Form is being maintained, but already there is talk of the Republican trio or trifecta: Trump’s party monopolizes the three branches in more than 30 states; and they aren’t shy about using this to grow, redrawing the boundaries of electoral districts and imposing arbitrary requirements to make it difficult for low-income Democrats to vote.
Time after time, President Trump has acted more like an absolute monarch. This absolute power of a “democratic trifecta,” in which the three branches of government are in the hands of the same party, is lacking in checks and balances. The deadly drone attack against controversial Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani was ordered by the leader of the greatest military power without any oversight. This shores up his hold over the right wing, contributing to the decline of democracy. The only available check on executive power, the Republican majority Senate, has looked away in the face of the solitary voice of the minority. This embodies Lord Acton’s dictum: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” He also said: “Money is power.”
Democracy is in decline, and armed conflicts are on the rise. In 2018, The Economist, one of the mainstays of liberal thought, published an essay with an invitation “… to reinvent liberalism for the 21st century.” It claims that liberalism is “under attack.” The attacks extend across the whole political spectrum, from the U.S. version that stigmatizes defending the protagonist state as leftist extremism, to the French version, which views liberalism as equivalent to the market fundamentalism of the radical right. The targets of the offensive are the liberal elites, who have been co-opted everywhere by the riches of globalization and are no longer agents of change.
The ambiguity with which those elites have taken on the excesses of free trade and the free market has turned democracy into the loser in the anti-liberal attack. The excessive concentration of wealth has contributed to the concentration of political power, to the extent that it has reinforced a crisis in political representation. The 99% do vote, but the 1% end up controlling the way the rules are arranged in their favor in the executive or legislative branches and even in the judicial branch, although to a lesser extent in the judicial brance because of its greater independence shaped over a long history.
Paul Krugman, Nobel Laureate in economics, wrote a very revealing piece in El País (Spain) about how the attack on democracy in the U.S. is being carried out. In the impeachment trial of President Trump before the Senate for serious abuse of presidential power to favor his reelection, what has been surprising is the unanimous support of members of Congress and Republican Party leaders, despite the overwhelming evidence for conviction.
Only the U.S. ambassador to the European Union, Gordon Sondland, has come out against Trump, asserting that there was in fact a quid pro quo in the Ukrainian affair. Even representatives in the House who don’t have to worry about reelection because they are not running have judiciously kept silent. Not a single one of them has dared to break with party discipline; in so doing, they have turned their backs on the moral imperative to put the country ahead of political parties.
Krugman invites readers to follow the money trail. All legislators, one way or another, are dependent on the generosity of the party machine’s wealthy donors to finance their campaigns, those who resign depend on those donors to land well-paid private jobs once they leave office. The exception is Ambassador Sondland; since he is a millionaire, he doesn’t need to rely on the generosity of third parties to maintain his lifestyle. This analysis coincides with that of The Economist. The liberal establishment has gotten used to the good life, and it is not going to risk its position for a principle.
The question is: how much concentration of power can a democracy take? Fortunately, there is a new generation, and the Democratic opposition in the U.S. has been working ceaselessly on this. But more and more, the power of presidents and prime ministers is growing and becoming excessive. Form is being maintained, but already there is talk of the Republican trio or trifecta: Trump’s party monopolizes the three branches in more than 30 states; and they aren’t shy about using this to grow, redrawing the boundaries of electoral districts and imposing arbitrary requirements to make it difficult for low-income Democrats to vote.
Time after time, President Trump has acted more like an absolute monarch. This absolute power of a “democratic trifecta,” in which the three branches of government are in the hands of the same party, is lacking in checks and balances. The deadly drone attack against controversial Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani was ordered by the leader of the greatest military power without any oversight. This shores up his hold over the right wing, contributing to the decline of democracy. The only available check on executive power, the Republican majority Senate, has looked away in the face of the solitary voice of the minority. This embodies Lord Acton’s dictum: “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” He also said: “Money is power.”
Previous article![]( "Can War Ever Achieve Peace?")
Next article![]( "Trump’s Speech at Davos Is Sending Chill Down European Spines")
