Authority

Authority is wrong, authority is right
– Operation Ivy

Growing up, I never liked to be told what to do. I didn’t want to recognize authority, and I looked for opportunities to show people that they could not control me. A cocky young boy, I didn’t want to listen to an adult just because they were an adult, nor to a teacher just because they were a teacher, nor to my parents just because they provided for me. Why can they tell me what to do? What authority do they have over me? Well, the answer is simpler than we often think. Yes, I was taught from birth that these people have authority over me, and so many aspects of my experience and of our society reinforced this notion. But, the only actual authority anyone had over me was that which they were willing and able to exercise and enforce.

If a group of masked men broke into your home and held you and your family at gunpoint, you would likely do what they say. If one of the men told you to lie face down on the floor or they will harm your family member, you would probably comply. You are now under this man’s authority, an authority that has been forced upon you. If you challenge that authority, you will likely be overpowered by the other men and forced to comply by whatever violence is necessary. You would be powerless to stop any abuse perpetrated by this man upon you or your family. As long as the other men support him and are willing to enforce his will with their strength, then he can do anything to you or your family members that he chooses. What gives him this power? Strength. And where does that strength come from? The other men. They are the key to this man’s authority. Authority is asserted by the exerciser but made manifest by those supporters who are willing and able to enforce that authority. Authority is the bureaucracy of power. It is the system around an individual that functions to keep the power of that individual in place.

Both democratic governments and authoritarian governments build infrastructure to support, reinforce, and enforce their continued authority. Both will say they do it for the good of the people and society. But the fundamental difference is whether the system of authority exists to keep power and wealth distributed among the people or whether it exists to facilitate wealth and power consolidation to a central person or small group of people. Again, that’s the defining difference.

Wolves

There are nights when the wolves are silent and only the moon howls.
– George Carlin

Wolves organize themselves into packs. They cooperate as units, each with a strict hierarchy. The pack relies on teamwork to hunt large prey, and in feeding, no wolf goes without. Offspring are raised by the entire pack, and the pack will collectively defend its territory as well, with the alphas often leading the charge.

In each pack, there’s an alpha pair (one male and one female) who lead the group. They make decisions about hunting, movement, and defending both pack and territory. The second ranking wolves are the beta wolves. These wolves are key in maintaining the alphas’ authority over the pack. The betas are enforcers and supporters. They mobilize and police the rest of the pack. If a strong wolf from the pack arises to make a challenge to the alpha, the beta wolves will either stop the challenge in support of the alpha or allow it to happen if they sense that the challenger is more powerful. The challenge fights are usually not too violent, as it becomes apparent who is going to win, and the losing wolf will eventually back down and leave the pack.

While the authority in a wolf pack is strict and enforced by violence as necessary, the leaders work to serve the good of the whole pack. Every wolf is raised and taught to hunt. Every wolf is protected from outside harm. Every wolf eats every time. No wolf ever takes more food than it can eat or resources than it can use. No alpha allows their own offspring to have food while other offspring go without. That doesn’t happen among wolves.

In human society though, we seem to lack those natural checks on power, as well as the empathy and support. Whereas the wolf takes what it needs, humans take everything we can. So, if we choose to live in a society – and we must – then we need checks on our power. If we choose to live in a democratic society – and we should – then we must build those checks into our government.

Checks and Balances

The American system of checks and balances is only as strong as the leaders who have the character and courage to enforce them.
– Neera Tanden

In 1782, George Washington received a letter from Col. Lewis Nicola of the Continental Army suggesting that Washington become king of the United States. Nicola argued the new nation needed a strong leader and centralized authority to avoid chaos. Washington was deeply offended by the suggestion and responded sternly, rejecting any notion of monarchy. His reply to Nicola emphasized his commitment to democratic principles and his belief in a government accountable to the people.

The following year, after the Treaty of Paris secured American independence, Washington again demonstrated his commitment to democracy by resigning his commission as commander-in-chief of the Continental Army rather than seeking greater power. This act was so unprecedented that King George III reportedly said that if Washington willingly gave up power, he would be “the greatest man in the world.”

Washington’s refusal to become a monarch set a powerful precedent for American leadership and was one of the reasons he was later unanimously elected as the first president under the U.S. Constitution in 1789. After serving two terms, he again voluntarily relinquished power in 1797, reinforcing the democratic tradition of peaceful transitions of leadership.

In a democratic government, we live by the rule of law and by the whim of no one. No one is above the law. We assign power to the office and not the person, and we have checks and balances on every office. We must be vigilant in reinforcing these checks. We must be keenly aware of any attempted attack on this system, as it is an attempt to consolidate power and control.

In our well-designed representative democracy here in the United States, we have three branches of government to disperse power and create a system of checks and balances:

• The Legislative Branch (congress) makes laws, controls the federal budget, declares war, confirms presidential appointments, and ratifies treaties.
• The Executive Branch (the president) enforces laws, can veto laws, commands the military, conducts foreign policy, negotiates treaties, and appoints federal judges and other officials.
• The Judicial Branch (courts and judges) interprets laws, reviews constitutionality of laws, and resolves disputes under federal law.

Congress has important checks on the president’s power, and ultimately, they have the authority to remove the president from power if necessary. The Judicial Branch has important checks on the president as well. Judges can declare executive actions unconstitutional and issue rulings that limit executive enforcement of laws.

Yes, every government is flawed, and yes our republic is messy, but the role of democracy as a mechanism to keep power distributed among the governed is necessary to check the power of a would-be king. Today, we have no Washington at our helm, but a Caesar. Currently, our system of checks and balances in the US is under attack by those who seek to take control of the government. To do so, they must dismantle or make loyal the roles that have power to check their own authority. Appointees, judges, congress members, and staffers will all be replaced with those who are loyal first to the people in power. These loyalists are the beta wolves that will enforce the rigid authority of the alpha who will arise as an authoritarian figurehead of the new American Empire.