Inconvenient Law

A recent article in the press cited a decision by the newly seated Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service to discontinue free tax filing. While I am sure that made a lot of folks at H&R Block et. al. very happy, it is yet another example of our current government doing away with services that benefit the public for no other reason than it suits them to do so. Such decisions from the highest office in the land on down are often not even portrayed in light of some understandable policy or economic rationale but simply enacted out of what might be best described as personal agenda.

The marginal cost of providing this service which since its inception has filed more than 65 million returns is practically nil. And it behooves the IRS to offer this as it vastly reduces the labor and effort that needs to be expended by IRS agents. But logic has nothing to do with his decision, it is all about the imposition of personal beliefs and will over the laws and lawful decisions of those with the constitutional authority to enact them in the first place. While some of these decisions are in the hands of the courts as we speak, other have either been overridden by a Supreme Court that has shown little regard for precedent--except when it serves them, and less regard for both Congress and the Constitution.

Make no mistake, such is the arrogance of cabinet appointees and elected officials alike that laws have almost no meaning anymore--and the complicity of SCOTUS and Congress in this dismantling of our rights and the democratic framework of our country has no precedent in our history--while it shockingly mirrors the actions that led Germany and Italy into the hands of facist regimes, and their eventual undoing. We are well beyond the realm of partisan politics--we are at a point where commentators openly wonder whether the seated President will permit the election process to continue--as if that is within the executive powers.

A line has been drawn in the sand daring any and all to cross and give justification for doing what it seems the administration intends in any event. There are blood thirsty elements on the right that openly wish for another Civil War, those that believe it is in any way justified to wish for the death of millions simply because they do not agree on religious, racial, or political cant.

Resistance in the face of this clear and present threat to our democracy has so far focused on pushing back on oligarchy and government by executive order. It is not likely to prove a winning strategy. In the face of overt disregard for law, for our Constitution or any other legitimate process such protest is aspirational at best. The fundamental challenge is that a return to what was is both infeasible and un-winnable. The reason that the current situation exists arose out of widespread disaffection for how things were--even if voters were naive enough to believe that empty promises by ill equipped individuals would set things right.

We have entered the realm of politics defining what we don't want--on both sides of the aisle. It is time to say what it is we do want--what kind of future we want for our country rather than countering the failed --empty, and foundering politics of the past or the lawless, grasping destructiveness of the present. Until we can articulate what is worth fighting for we cannot expect anyone to stand for it. If we wonder why a so-called radical candidate can win a primary in New York City and why his own party disclaims him we would do well to look at what he proposed. Real, meaningful reforms. tangible benefits to the 99%, and not another batch of overcooked, tired, lame and pointless gestures. While it is unclear as of now how that election and others like it may fare, it offers for the first time a glimmer of the only resistance we can hope to deliver us from the mess we have made. It's time to stop looking backward and face the future.