Funny how a little historical perspective can be so illuminating; sad that we seem to be repeating our past errors anyway: At Ease, Mr. President
When Abraham Lincoln took actions based on military considerations, he gave himself the proper title, â€œcommander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States.â€ That title is rarely â€” more like never â€” heard today. It is just â€œcommander in chief,â€ or even â€œcommander in chief of the United States.â€ This reflects the increasing militarization of our politics. The citizenry at large is now thought of as under military discipline. In wartime, it is true, people submit to the national leadership more than in peacetime. The executive branch takes actions in secret, unaccountable to the electorate, to hide its moves from the enemy and protect national secrets. Constitutional shortcuts are taken â€œfor the duration.â€ But those impositions are removed when normal life returns.
But we have not seen normal life in 66 years. The wartime discipline imposed in 1941 has never been lifted, and â€œthe durationâ€ has become the norm. World War II melded into the cold war, with greater secrecy than ever â€” more classified information, tougher security clearances. And now the cold war has modulated into the war on terrorism.
[…] Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihanâ€™s prescient last book, â€œSecrecy,â€ traced the ever-faster-growing secrecy of our government and said that it strikes at the very essence of democracy â€” accountability of representatives to the people. How can the people hold their representatives to account if they are denied knowledge of what they are doing? Wartime and war analogies are embraced because these justify the secrecy. The representative is accountable to citizens. Soldiers are accountable to their officer. The dynamics are different, and to blend them is to undermine the basic principles of our Constitution.