Action or Inaction
American Political Dynamics
Don’t just sit there, do something!
There is danger in the air. It is about the upcoming American elections scheduled to be held this November. The immediate threat concerns the integrity of those elections. First, there’s the risk of manipulating the voting process to distort the results. Even more alarming is the possibility of obstructing the vote count, delaying it, manipulating the Electoral College, or preventing Congress from certifying the vote altogether. Throughout these processes, numerous pressure points exist at the local, county, state, and federal levels, making them vulnerable to attack.
When there is a clear and present danger, a threat that is predictable and eminent, the wisest course is to not only prepare to defend against it, but to also take some preventative measures to head it off, or to defuse that threat.
A purely defensive approach tends to be reactive, occurring after the events have taken place. This approach has often proven to be ineffective. Before WWII, the French saw Germany rearming and moving into neutral territories near France. Yet, instead of taking action, they merely reinforced the Maginot Line. When Germany eventually attacked, they simply bypassed these fortifications, rendering the defense futile. France was lost before there was time to react effectively.
In our present situation, the response often focuses on setting up barriers and deploying more police and military to guard specific areas in case of violent demonstrations during or after the election. But this is a purely reactive measure—responding to violence rather than preventing it. Worse, we can’t predict where or when these incidents will occur. We can’t be everywhere at once.
Another tactic used to undermine the election involves altering the election rules to disrupt the election results, the counting and reporting processes. Defending against this relies on navigating the legal system and the courts.
In both scenarios, those who would disrupt the election not only choose the battleground but often succeed in achieving their goals while we’re left reacting, possibly taking them to court, after the fact. We’ve seen how slow and ineffective the legal system can be in offering timely solutions.
A proactive, preventative response is far more effective. If you can anticipate a threat, you should find ways to prevent it from happening. If there’s a man-eating lion loose in the neighborhood and you know how to remove its teeth, it would be irresponsible not to act.
Let’s consider the threat of terrorism. After 9/11, we saw how seriously the President, Congress, and the entire nation responded. We detained individuals, passed restrictive laws, launched wars, spent trillions of dollars, and killed many people, all in the name of combating international terrorism.
Today, we face the threat of domestic terrorism. This election brings a strong likelihood of violent demonstrations similar to the January 6th, 2021, insurrection. While we don’t know the exact locations or timing of these events, we know that well-organized, and often armed groups are standing by, waiting for a signal to act. This threat is even more severe since it endangers the very foundations of our democracy
What are we waiting for? We must act now to disband these groups before it’s too late.
When it comes to manipulating election rules and processes, waiting to take legal action after the fact is often futile. By then, they’ve already achieved their goals, the election is over, and the damage is done—it becomes a moot point.
It’s like a town with a beautiful park that a corporation wants to replace with a mega-mall. People complain and work to slow the process down, but one day, they wake up to bulldozers destroying the park and construction already underway. Legal actions may follow, but the park is gone for good and all that’s left is to turn it into something commercially useful. As the saying goes, it’s easier to apologize than to ask permission.
The solution is preventative action—preempting the threat, not waiting for the inevitable and reacting too late. Once they’ve achieved their goals, what’s lost can’t be regained, no matter what the courts say.
So, how do we address these very real domestic threats to our democratic system of governance in this upcoming election? Think back to how we handled the perceived threat of the American Communist Party. We outlawed them, labeling them as a group intent on overthrowing the government. I don’t see how today’s threat is any different—in fact, it’s even more immanent now.
And what tools do we have available? We have a sitting president who is not only Commander in Chief but is also ultimately responsible for protecting us from all national security threats. And now, thanks to the Supreme Court, a sitting president is given immunity for his presidential actions which, in the past, might have appeared questionable or even illegal.
If this isn’t a national security threat, I don’t know what is.
The President is ultimately responsible for protecting us from all national security threats. The President could declare election manipulation a national security threat and, if necessary, even declare martial law. There are likely provisions within the Homeland Security laws from 9/11 that could be useful. He could outlaw armed militias by declaring them to be domestic terrorism threats, take control of the electoral process to prevent tampering, and impose swift, severe punishment for anyone interfering with the election.
The President can head off threats to the electoral process in numerous ways. He has the power, but he must have the courage to use it. There are certainly enough legal experts who can devise strategies to safeguard this election and protect our democracy in the next few weeks.
But we must act peremptorily. Our inaction will only cause disaster, with the results being a loss of democracy, or another four years of electoral limbo with the election results continuing to be questioned while we wait for the next crisis to unfold.
A final word on violence: Once domestic unrest starts, the “old gods of war and blood” push at the gates, eager to justify slaughter, death, and destruction. Things can spiral out of control quickly, with actions and reactions escalating into total chaos.
