Further thoughts on Trump's election - Part 3

-
This post is the third in a series of musings about Trump's election in which I identify five concerns and then suggest a response to each (follow these links to read the first and second posts).
  1. Concerns that Trump's win points toward a fracturing of the Union, e.g., as liberal, more youthful populations, who live along the coasts find themselves increasingly alienated from older, less affluent, less educated, more conservative populations who live in the nation's broad middle
(For more on the demographic disparities between Trump supporters and foes, read this article from the Washington Post.)
Generational divides are not new. What troubles me about this divide is its geographic component, i.e., the US is increasingly segregated as people choose to live in homogenous neighborhoods defined primarily by shared values. In many respects, this is the most intractable of my list of concerns about a Trump presidency and best addressed through acting on the recommendations in response to the other four concerns.
  1. Trepidation that Trump's election moves the US toward an authoritarian dictatorship, a fear heightened by Trump's repeated and flagrant disregard for facts, the ongoing involvement of his children in both his business and the government, and his evident reluctance to step completely aside from his business interests in order to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest.
The US is a nation in which the rule of law, not the rule of individuals, prevails. A written Constitution, independent judiciary, and adversarial legal system combine to support the rule of law. Vigilant observation of Trump administration personnel, their actions, and their decisions followed by courageous and unswerving efforts to prosecute legal transgressions are the best defense against replacing the rule of law with the rule of persons. Some Trump opponents have already committed publicly to following this path.
People best exercise this option prudentially. Numerous and unrestrained legal maneuvers can reduce the public credibility of these efforts (as happened with the dozens of cases filed against the Obama administration by GOP foes) and unintentionally undercut other efforts to reform or move the political process in constructive directions.

Impeachment by the House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate, followed by removal from office is the ultimate legal sanction. Trump appears headed in that direction for at least two reasons. First, his involvement of his children in government affairs may violate nepotism laws enacted after JFK nominated his brother as Attorney General. Second, some of Trump's global businesses partner with foreign governments, creating a prima facie violation of the Constitution's emoluments clause that forbids any US government official from accepting benefits from a foreign government.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A starting point for theology

-
Theology used to be known as the queen of the sciences.Theology was dethroned several centuries ago because of the growing recognition of the scientific method’s inapplicability to theology.
In general, theologians have begun their work from one of two starting points, either implicitly or explicitly.
One of those starting points was God.Theologians working from this starting point presumed that humans could directly apprehend God.For example, the classical arguments for the existence of God – the ontological, cosmological, and so forth – all rest on this presumption.
This starting point requires assuming that humans are able to know God.Consequently, some religious traditions posit that humans have a soul that is similar in nature to God.The Roman Catholic Church, for example, teaches that at conception a human receives an immortal soul.Many other traditions have similar teachings about humans having an immortal or eternal soul.Since the soul is immortal, there is no physical eviden…
Read more

Advent demands we learn patience

-
According to a traditional Hebrew story, Abraham was sitting outside his tent one evening when he saw an old traveler, weary from age and travel, coming toward him. Abraham rushed out, greeted the traveler, and then invited him into his tent. There he washed the old man's feet and gave him food and drink. When the old man immediately began to eat without saying any prayer or blessing, Abraham asked him, "Don't you worship God?"

The old traveler replied, "I worship only fire and reverence no other god."

When he heard this, Abraham became incensed, grabbed the old man by the shoulders, and threw him out of his tent into the cold night air.

When the old man had departed, God called to his friend Abraham and asked where the stranger was. Abraham replied, "I forced him out because he did not worship you."

God answered, "I have suffered him these eighty years although he dishonors me. Could you not endure him one night?"[1]

This morning’s epistle r…
Read more

TMT

-
The question of whether to support or oppose building the Thirty Meter Telescope (TMT) atop Mauna Kea, a dormant volcano on the island of Hawai’i, has recently attracted the national media’s attention and preoccupied a significant portion of The Episcopal Church in Hawai’i (TECH). The controversy came to a head in July when TMT opponents physically prevented construction crews and their equipment from using the only access road to the site. Over three thousand protesters have spent time in the encampment that blocks access. In spite of final court approval and issuance of all relevant permits, construction of TMT atop Mauna Kea now appears unlikely.
As an ethicist, a mediator and a Christian priest, I offer three observations.
First, the discipline of ethics offers little help in resolving ethical dilemmas such as this one that have valid, rational arguments on each side. The two sides rely upon different, incompatible frameworks to justify their conflicting positions.
Proponents advance…
Read more