|
given the style of governing preferred by the bush people---working from a real or manufactured state of emergency, arguing for the maximum possible latitude for the executive, reducing the legislature to a politburo-like relation to the rampant executive---it was plausible at one point to imagine that, presented with the correct situation, that something on the order of a coup could happen, simply because it represented a small step structurally from how the administration already worked---but in practice, like em or not, and i really really do not like the bush people, they stayed within the general ambit of the legitimate system---but this was all more plausible a paranoid scenario during the period of actual credibility. at this point, i don't think that the bush administration has the political support anywhere to do any such thing. the curious element is that the financial crisis IS the kind of situation that would have fit the bill---you have a legislature which appears incapable of making a decision, and a crisis bearing down--so the argument could be floated that a Leader is required to Make A Decision and for that to happen a Real state of emergency would be necessary---and a Real one is martial law, which is also the suspension of the constitutional order.
barring some theater that we haven't seen yet, i don't see it happening.
the bush people are dead in the water.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|