Wednesday, May 03, 2006

Unitary Executive="Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Democracy

If we think through the logic of the unitary executive theory promoted by the Bush II administration, we are forced to arrive at the conclusion that this is "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" democracy. They claim that they represent the people as they were elected and successful election shows that the people approve of their policies. But the theory of the unitary executive means that the administration thinks it never really needs to tell the people what has been done in it's name and further, that for representatives of the people to inquire what policies have been instituted, what actions the state has taken that they were supposed to approve or disapprove in the last election, is not properly the people's business.

In fact, they claim that during a time of war it is an act of treason for any employee of the executive branch to inform the people what it is doing. In other words, according to the unitary theory of the executive, the will of the people prevails, just as long as we the people don't have the temerity to ask what they are doing, and just as long as the members of the executive branch don't deign to tell us what has been done.

But as was the case with "don't ask, don't tell" as a strategy for reforming military policy, it quickly becomes clear that DADT is not a strategy for action, it is a strategy of avoidance.

In other words, the Bush administration's theory of the unitary executive essentially tells us that the most successful and effective way to ensure that the will of the people is done is to absolutely avoid the question of what the executive does.

From the perspective of the theory of the unitary executive, democracy= blind faith. The more blind our faith in the state is, the more we may rest assured that our will is being done! Lack of transparency is thus the key to effective democracy. Now do you understand?