|
February 26, 2004
|
It's gotta be tough to be the President.
No matter where you go, no matter what you do, somebody is going to hate you. Our society has developed a culture that encourages vocal dissent -- and that's not necessarily a bad thing -- which means that no matter where the President is, you will find protesters (protestors?) near at hand, shouting their disapproval of one thing or the other.
It doesn't matter which political party the President claims as his own, and it doesn't matter how decorated or how dubious his record before or while in office. He's going to be protested everywhere he travels, and he's going to be protested right outside his domicile when he stays home.
And so, he must travel in isolation from the people. Secret Service agents must sweep the area long before the President can be allowed to arrive; he must travel in motorcades and private aircraft.
Much the same can be said for so many other elected officials. The more visible the position, the more the office holder must isolate him or herself from the protesters and, at the same time, *all* of their constituents.
I'm reminded of all of this right now because today I've been working in a building across the street from where the President came in to give a talk at a fund-raising lunch. Traffic -- human, car, and air -- had to be rerouted and local businesses saw huge swings (some up, some down) in their activity levels. I wasn't much affected, which is fine by me. But I noticed that even as the Secret Service began to make their presence known in the area last night, so, too, did the protesters this morning.
I'm not sure, since I couldn't read their signs from up here on the fifteenth floor of the office building where I'm working today, but I think the issue for these particular protesters had to do with employment. I'm sure the President traveled to other events today as well, where he may well have been greeting by protesters concerned about marriage rights or world trade or the Middle East.
Anyone who signs up for the job at the Oval Office is taking on the bad with the good, and that's just the way it goes. But these willy-nilly protests are a bother that have the unintended consequence of isolating the leaders from the general population.
What can we do about this?
We should streamline the haphazard means of expressing our discontent. The first and most obvious change that we simply must pursue is institutionalizing and formalizing our petitions for redress.
First: we must initiate impeachment proceedings the day after each new President is sworn into office. Make this a formal, standing arrangement. If the impeachment should fail, the next impeachment process should be initiated two weeks later, thereby allowing all parties to enjoy a brief vacation before work resumes. This should be codified in the Constitution.
Second: encourage the development of a permanent, professional protester corps. Disaffected Americans can register their complaints with the professional protesters, who will picket and shout on behalf of the population following established rules of protesting etiquette. This should help to reduce the impact of Presidential visits upon local businesses and residents, and free up ad hoc protesters to pursue their daily business with minimal discomfort.
And, while I propose these two actions with tongue firmly planted in cheek, don't be surprised when, fifty years from now, what I have proposed has come to pass.
Posted by on February 26, 2004 02:00 PM in the following Department(s): Tidbits III
|
Comments
|
Good thing you aren't being paid for your spelling! Employement? Travelled? Ettiquette? Or is there a hidden message? The three misspellings have the extra letters E-L-T, which is an Emergency Locater Transmitter in airplane jargon. Are you lost and needing to be found?
PS: no fair critiquing my home page, I have not done any maintenance on it in years!
Posted by: mike on February 26, 2004 2:36 PMHello, Allan. I look forward to meeting you at the novel workshop in two weeks. See you then!
Posted by: Rob Vagle on February 26, 2004 4:05 PMI blame my spelling errors on the government. I don't know how or why, but surely they are to blame.
Posted by: Allan on February 27, 2004 7:35 AMI have corrected the alleged "spelling errors". I'm glad I have such devoted readers who can spot these things.
But what about the *ideas*? The more I think about it, the more I think we are going to have a professional, licensed field of protesters within our lifetimes. You'll have to register your complaints with the appropriate authorities in order to make sure that the protests are carried out on your behalf.
Mmmmm. Bureaucracy.
Hmmmm. How do you spell Bureaucracy? Anyone?
--Allan
Posted by: Allan on February 27, 2004 7:47 AMGood concept on the protester corps, but I think that it is, for the most part, already in place. Go visit many activist organizations' websites (e.g. Greenpeace) and you will be offered an online store of registrations, petitions, and donation forms. If you choose to, say, save the whales, you can essentially contract Greenpeace to do the hard work. Your contractor payment is even tax-deductible by the federal gov't, no? What percentage of the the typical protest crowd is ad-hoc, vs. organized? I don't know, but my feel is that the majority have been contracted to protest by a larger population.
The prohibition of ad-hoc demonstrators has a good chance of happening. I doubt that we'll hit your 50-year mark before we see it: don't we currently require organized protest groups of over n people to obtain a permit (darned if I'm able to find the correct fed/state agency for this, though)? And their behavior is certainly regulated; if they get too nasty they get zip-ties on their wrists and a free ride in a smelly van.
Of course, you can see a fine model for this in the modern press conference. That pack of barking dogs has been taught to sit quietly in the kennel under certain circumstances. Invites are for the few, and information-sharing rules exist. You can probably buy a question if you approach the correct invitee. Behavior is regulated via negative reinforcement: no manners, no future invite. Perhaps professional protest will adopt a similarly docile atmosphere, with grievances preregistered and questions screened?
Posted by: Alan Erickson on February 28, 2004 8:18 AMOf course, "travelled" was the correct spelling of the word. Sigh.
We already have professional protestors in the guise of lobbyists. They protest on behalf of anyone who can afford to pay them.
Posted by: Patrick Samphire on March 1, 2004 3:41 AMBoth spellings of traveled/travelled are correct. The preferred spelling is the one listed first.
Posted by: D.A.Steendahl on March 1, 2004 5:52 PMI like the idea of protestor corps. Right now I am tired of protestors who get in the way, get physical, or are just annoying. and I hate protestor hangars-on. Like people who show up to an anti-war rally with signs about pro-choice.
Posted by: Tempest on March 4, 2004 2:05 PM|
Post a comment
|
Copyright (c)1998 - 2010 by Allan Rousselle. All rights reserved, all wrongs reversed, all reservations righted, all right, already.
Click here to send me mail.
