OF POWER you can not do without, for this should be limited. Hannah Arendt wrote that the power needs no excuses "as is inherent in any political community." What they need is legitimacy. Regular exercise of political power in public and allow the limitation that best fits with the legality and individual freedom, or with the principles and practice of constitutional democracy. Arendt wrote in 1971, commenting on what the public America was discovering, thanks to the press: a pattern of systematic abuse of power deployed by the White House to fill the role of intelligence and State Department in Indochina and Vietnam since the Second World War.
Arendt laid bare the manipulation of information, lie deliberately orchestrated, the violation of the constitution and civil rights. Hiding behind the pretext of national interests, American leaders cared instead of protecting their image. Covered their real intentions and actions to be believed clear from the public. Assumed, therefore, that political power was just as public used it as a private matter - that's why their action was to remain hidden, because improper under the law, or because an abuse.
abuse of power is a very serious because it destroys a polity turning citizens into subjects, making it the subject of deception, putting them in a position of not knowing and then can not judge with jurisdiction, leaving the leader in the extraordinary freedom to do what he wants. Abuse undermines the confidence without which no damage political relations in a society based on law. Liberalism has taken the best of this problem, since he first assumed that the power you need, and secondly that its exercise stimulates appetite in men not get enough and therefore to abuse it. The power feeds the passion for power with an escalation toward fatal monopoly. All modern constitutions begin with the premise that one should always wait for the violation and abuse by those in power and to institutionalize this governmental functions and shaking the political power within strict rules and clear. From this liberal conception of the idea took shape that the only legitimacy that political power can acquire is that which comes from respect guarantees of individual liberty and, therefore, the limitation and control of power (limited in duration and intensity through the elections, the constitutionality and the separation of powers) through the constraints that govern who can not tamper with. Violate the limits that the defense of this freedom imposes equivalent to putting ourselves outside the law (a fact of sedition that led John Locke to justify the disobedience and rebellion, adding disconsolate tones that unfortunately people have more ability to suffer the abuses that rebel against them). The power that will not work for more political power, and then, but it's absolute rule and naked power so that makes those subjected to a servant in all respects. The difference between domain and government is all here.
Hannah Arendt's reflections fit like a glove with what is happening in our country. The fact that instead of an unjust war we are dancing in erotic relationships with minors and young women do not change the nature of arbitrary power. If anything makes it more depressing and sordid. But even in the Italian case, the handling, packaging art to the facts, and are hiding the weapons used by a government which, he explained Giuseppe D'Avanzo, has established a "crisis desk" to rewrite "the truth of the call on prime minister the police station. "concealment of the truth is, added the distortion of facts designed (with implications that put Italy in bad light in international relations) because the phone call to convince them to release the minor has been said that the girl was the granddaughter Egyptian President Mubarak. The Italian prime minister uses his authority as guardian of the national interest to cover its own wrongdoing. Abuse in the round, and also made fun of your country and lying involvement of a foreign state.
In a constitutional democracy the Prime Minister and the Ministers (the executive) receive legitimacy from the founding pact that sets the rules for their designation and their duration and, where appropriate, their removal to the possibility of being subjected to the ordinary justice "for crimes committed in the exercise of their functions "following the authorization of the Senate or the Chamber of Deputies (Article 96, which in the original formulation in 1947, then sopposta reviewed in 1989, was much more severe and included the possibility of putting in a" state of 'indictment', a formula similar impeachment American). These rules and limits that define political action as a result, stipulating that it belongs to the community policy and not to those who exercise it, which can not substitute his personal opinion on how to relate to the institutions that defined by law, from which he depends. The abuse stops just the public face of power by making exercise a fact all private at this point that the power you naked power, discretion in the hands of those who handle, as an instrument of privilege. The ruler who violates the rules governing his work takes possession of the power and turn to his interests. Nadia Urbinati
0 comments:
Post a Comment