A KAkISTOCRACY—What exactly is it?
The issues I’m going to discuss in this blog post are based on the situation as I see it in the United States. Many persons will disagree with me, but I suspect many will also agree with my view of things.
Kakistocracy, noun: A government where the worst of the worse are in power. Have we morphed into a kakistocracy?
I think we have.
Let’s start with the top spot. Do we have a man acting as our president whose so-called long form birth certificate may be in question? An official law enforcement investigation brought about by a request from a large number of an Arizona county sheriff’s constituents, revealed strong evidence that our acting president’s so-called long form Hawaii birth certificate may be a multi-layered computer generated forgery. According to Article II; sec. 4, of the U.S. Constitution which states: The President and all officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. I believe an alleged forgery of a birth certificate that puts in question, an acting president’s “natural born” citizen status, qualifies as possible high crimes and misdemeanors, and should be grounds for further investigation and possible impeachment proceedings.
But to whom does that sheriff deliver this evidence? Did we not have a justice department that was, at the time, and still is, I believe, in the hind pocket of this acting president? Did we not have a House of Representatives at the time with a recreant Speaker too timid and unwilling, for whatever reasons, to bring impeachment proceedings against the acting president? I believe we did.
Did we not have a Senate majority leader who, in all likelihood, might have refused to call for a trial against this acting president if such an impeachment were brought forth?
And I question whether the Supreme Court Chief Justice, who is charged by the Constitution to preside over a presendential impeachment trial, would have been willing to preside over such a trial. Do we meet the premise of a kakistocracy? It’s my opinion, we damn well better consider the possibility.
In other areas do we not have politicians who seem to pay no attention to the principles of our Constitution? Whether this is because of ignorance, or cupidity, I’m not sure, but whatever the reason, I believe it puts them in the category of the worst of the worse. Have we not had members of the judiciary accused of legislating from the bench, handing down decisions based on their own beliefs and according to their personal agenda? Do we not have bureaucracies that trample private property rights, and write regulations that impose punitive restrictions and penalties without trial, i.e., for instance,OSHA, EPA,ESA?
Do we not have politicians who appear more interested in keeping their cushy seats in Congress by pandering to special interest groups in order to buy votes, than doing what’s right overall for the country?
The worst thing that can happen to any society, in my opinion, is career politicians and bureaucrats. The Founding Fathers were good and honest men who had the interests of the people at heart. They never envisioned career politicians, bureaucrats and judges, or I’m certain they would have put the condition of term limits into the Constitution. They looked upon serving in public office as a civic duty; one in which people would serve for a brief time, and then return home to private life and their regular vocation.
There are some who contend we have a term limit clause in the Constitution—the ballot box—but I have what I think is a good argument against that fallacy. If the longevity of a representative or senator affected only the people who elected them, then I would agree the ballot box might be enough of a term limiting factor. But nationally, that isn’t the case. Career politicians that are elected to the U. S. Congress affect people in states who have no voting jurisdiction over those legislators, but those legislators’ actions can affect people living outside the states that elected them. For instance, those of us who live in in the West have no jurisdiction to vote for, or against, liberal socialist candidates (Republicans and Democrats alike) from Northeastern states who manage to continually get elected by voters in those states year after year, and whose actions in Congress affect every citizen in the country, not just those Northeastern states.
These politicians work themselves into powerful positions that the rest of us who can’t vote for them have to live with. Many manage to stay in office thirty and forty years. Thomas Jefferson was correct when he said: “When a man casts a longing eye on an office, a rottenness begins in his behavior.” So, no, the ballot box is not a good term limiting factor.
I also believe the Founding Fathers were a bit naïve when they assumed members of the judiciary would all be, and would remain, honest to the dictates of our Constitution. That, too, appears to be a fallacy. There should be term limits on all members of the judiciary as well as other branches of government. Longevity breeds corruption and kakistocracy.(Ooops, there’s that strange word again). 🙂
My personal opinion is that six years in any government position should be the maximum time anyone could, or should, serve, and that includes bureaucrats as well. And there should be no cushy retirement program for these government servants, either. They should prepare for their own retirement out of their earnings the same as private citizens have to do. This, I believe, would return government service back to just that—government service. Too many people these days look at government employment for the benefits it provides and not as a service to their country.
Also available on all five e-reader devices.