On Bureaucratic and Judicial Oligarchy
Democracy, in the abstract, is neither good nor bad. It is simply a method of organizing the state, one in which the people, or some portion of it, choose representatives to govern the nation. Liberals, in the classical sense of the word, do not accept this claim: they believe democracy is an inherent good and that no form of government can be good unless it is a democracy. The modern liberal view requires one to affirm the notion that democracy is good no matter what actual governmental and societal results come from it. No one actually believes this (liberals included), but that’s the mantra. That liberals themselves do not believe this is evident when democratically elected governments refuse to govern according to the principles of contemporary progressive morality (sexual, racial, or otherwise). In such instances, even democratically elected governments must be destroyed. Examples abound: Europe and America’s successful support for toppling the democratically elected government of Ukraine in 2014, similar pressure being placed on the democratically elected government of Hungary today, and so on.
America’s founders did not accept this modern liberal notion because they understood that a democratic government would only be good if the people choosing their representatives were themselves good (and, for that matter, if their representatives were good). “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other” (John Adams). Etc. etc. It is questionable whether the majority of Americans are good enough, in the sense in which the founders insisted, to maintain a stable democracy. Because of our federal system, there may be some places in America where this is still possible, though there are clearly some places where it is not, at least at the moment.
Democracy can be a good thing, but it can lead to much evil. (Lest someone respond that America is a republic, not a democracy, I realize this. I am simply using democracy interchangeably with democratic republic). In general, it is good for good people to be given a large amount of freedom to rule themselves. Continual interference from on high in matters best left to the self-governance of individuals and communities is unhealthy. Normal people who normally know best what they need for themselves are best left alone to achieve it.
The question that confronts us today is this: is America actually a democracy at all? It is not entirely a new revelation, but the work Elon Musk, DOGE, and various newly appointed Trump officials have been doing in exposing the inner workings of America’s vast governmental bureaucracy would seem to indicate that America is, in fact, a democracy in name only (a DINO).
To determine the true form of a government, one need ask the simple question: “Who rules?” Who has the actual power to implement his, or its, intentions and goals for the nation? The answer, at this point in America’s history, regardless of what our Constitution affirms, is twofold. First, real power resides in America’s governmental agencies. Second, real power resides in our judges. Both are, or have been for some time, able to put into concrete practice their designs for the nation.
The reality, then, appears to be that America is no longer a democracy, regardless of the lip service all sides pay to our constitutional system. What is it? It is a bureaucratic and judicial oligarchy. Oligarchy has traditionally been the word applied to a small group of wealthy and powerful elites who exercise the real power in a nation. It is the “rule of the few.” The real locus of political power in America today is not an oligarchy in the strict sense because the power is not necessarily found only in a small group of wealthy or powerful elites but instead resides in America’s government agencies and in the courts. Thus, it is more widely dispersed than in previous oligarchies. But it is still the “rule of the few” relative to the total population.
For those who love the American founding (as I do), this is a difficult and painful reality to accept. Most people would rather soothe themselves with empty platitudes about an age that no longer exists. America’s original constitutional order was a very good thing. Restoring it in reality (and not just name) would be good as well. But refusing to accept the reality of our current form of actual governance, our bureaucratic and judicial oligarchy, will do nothing to bring us back to the principles of our founding.
One possible response to what I’ve said would be to insist that, like democracy, bureaucratic and judicial oligarchy is neither good nor bad in the abstract. Some might even argue that the bureaucratic and judicial oligarchy should simply be redirected toward good aims. Others, while rejecting libertarianism as an absolute ideological principle, recognize that the lowest levels of government (city, county, etc.) are best positioned to determine their own affairs in a way that is good for their people, and that classic American self-determination is a good thing. I fall into the latter camp. Libertarianism is wrong as an abstract moral principle. Government is a God-ordained good that can and should be used to do good. But the bureaucratic and judicial oligarchy ruling over us rules over us badly because it rules over us at all. Federal agencies, staffed by distant bureaucrats captured by perverse ideologies, cannot hope to meet the true needs of the American people because they cannot even know what those needs are. That is the case regardless of the ideological slant of the oligarchy. While some aspects of the bureaucratic oligarchy may be reformable, the efforts of the current administration to dismantle it are welcome.
What can bring us back to the principles of our founding? It obviously remains to be seen whether President Trump and Elon Musk will be successful in taking on America’s bureaucratic and judicial oligarchy, but at least they are trying. What will be necessary? DOGE is a good start. Figuring out how to end judicial tyranny is also imperative, as Ben Crenshaw has argued.
Realistically, the best we can probably hope for in the short term is that the bureaucratic oligarchy is dismantled in Red States, or at least that its effects are significantly diminished. Perhaps over time, more can be done. The fact that so many, right and left, have equated American constitutional government with bureaucratic and judicial oligarchy will make this difficult. For this reason, the decisive action necessary among our leaders will, at times, itself appear undemocratic (eliminating entire federal agencies like the Department of Education, etc.). But it must be done if we are ever to throw off the yoke of the tyranny of the bureaucratic and judicial oligarchy. Though in disarray at the moment, the oligarchy will not fade away without a fight. But brighter days do appear on the horizon. Many have had enough, and decisive leaders have begun the long-delayed counterrevolution, one that may even allow for the restoration of our constitutional order, the classic order of American self-governance.
Image Credit: Unsplash
Is elon not an oligarch?
The above is a framing attempt to rationalize the horrific anti-democratic moves by our wannabe dictator President. You know, the man who wanted his citizens to be like those from North Korea and who wanted his generals to be like the yes-men Hitler had. And finally, the man who has sided with a brutal dictator over a struggling democracy.
If a democracy can be reduced to the rule of the majority, then the above article might have a point or two to make and Russia and Iran could be classified as democracies. But for a democracy to exist, a nation needs more than just to follow democratic procedures, it needs equality for all of its citizens. And America was getting closer to that with the emergence of the LGBT community garnering the recognition of rights.
We had no Bureaucracy or Judicial rule in our nation. The agencies we had were funded by and answerable to Congress and not the other way around. The Judicial branch used The Constitution as canon to measure whether a practice or law passed by Congress violated principles on which our government was founded as well as our rights. From the beginning, the man who knows little to no self-restraint has been trying to reform government so that he has no political/legal constraint. That man quoted Napoleon in saying that he cannot violate any law since he is “saving” our nation. Saving it from what?
And so the above article is just another disingenuous attempt to rationalize Trump’s seemingly insatiable thirst for power, money, and self-recognition. I would have said ‘prestige’ for the last term but Trump is the narcissist that he is.
Saving it from limp-wristed Female Adjacent Guys like you.
Andrew,
Is that all you can say? Trump has taught Americans many bad lessons and one of them is to blindly hurl meaningless insults at those with whom they disagree.
My My my my … American Reformer is sooOOOO sounding like ‘The Real Woke Right Queens of Hillsdale’ …
ya’ll need a broader edu-mu-cation and to get out with regular people more, especially rural folks who actually work ‘dirty hard jobs’ … unlike you ‘Hillsdale’ guys in your well groomed jobs (looking very ‘GAY’ in those expensive hair cuts and trendy shirts, btw).
REAL AMERICANS out here want some of the things you say – like substantially returning education to state and local authority – but they always want no longer to be left behind. FEW can afford your FANCY PANTSY ‘Classical Christian Academies’, etc. Public education, therefore, NEEDS A LOT of MONEY for local values and priorities to be taught! THAT takes a LOT more money, that has not been forthcoming from either Democratic or Republican leadership. How about a discussion of that?! Or doesn’t actual policy discuss get you hard?
Apparently you prefer to beat off with practically pointless bumper sticker slogans like this:
” Many have had enough, and decisive leaders have begun the long-delayed counterrevolution, one that may even allow for the restoration of our constitutional order, the classic order of American self-governance. ”
DUH! VERY ‘Frantic Wives of Hillsdale’! Try discussing real life/real world policy rather than ideology for a change.
There is almost NEVER any practical common sense in AF essays. It sounds like you’ve never had an elected or appointed role in even your local government. Have you ever been appointed to work through your local jurisdiction’s Comprehensive Plan? Have you ever been elected to build a local jurisdiction’s budget? Have you ever even spent a full year – not to mention 3,5,10 years – volunteering with your local food pantry or Meals on Wheels? volunteering with local social services or behavioral health services? volunteering with the literacy group? etc.
The typical American Reformer essay also includes veiled – or sometimes explicit – eugenical theories. Like this:
” It is questionable whether the majority of Americans are good enough, in the sense in which the founders insisted, to maintain a stable democracy. Because of our federal system, there may be some places in America where this is still possible, though there are clearly some places where it is not, at least at the moment. ”
Why do you HATE rural working class folks THAT MUCH!? Not of mention other working class or poor folks?! Many regular working class folks – including (SURPRISE!) in rural America – are MULTIRACIAL households and extended families. AND THAT really turns you off, apparently. VERY racial eugenics and class eugenics of you! WOW! You basically called them ‘White Trash’ or ‘Mulatto Race Mixing Trash’ didn’t you? Yep, you did.
We’d be glad to know from every American Reformer essayist:
– what is your church/congregation? (we’d like to look up what service in the name of Jesus, the Lord, you actually do?)
– what elected or appointed roles in local governance you’ve held and kept for at least a year?
– where you take vacations? where you own property? what your regular contacts are with working class communities?
Please let us know. Thank you.
Man, reading the first sentence or two of these overlong rants makes it pretty clear that it’s not worth the effort.