Saturday , October 22 2016
Home / Spectrum / The Secret Government won’t change no matter who you vote for

The Secret Government won’t change no matter who you vote for

shadow government

Some believe that secret government is the one that is actually pulling the strings. Because of this, voting doesn’t really change anything – the ones in charge remain the same.

According to Tufts University political scientist Michael J. Glennon, the people we elect aren’t the ones calling the shots.

The voters who put Barack Obama in office expected some big changes. From the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping to Guantanamo Bay to the Patriot Act, candidate Obama was a defender of civil liberties and privacy, promising a dramatically different approach from his predecessor.

But six years into his administration, the Obama version of national security looks almost indistinguishable from the one he inherited.

Guantanamo Bay remains open. The NSA has, if anything, become more aggressive in monitoring Americans.

Drone strikes have escalated. Most recently it was reported that the same president who won a Nobel Prize in part for promoting nuclear disarmament is spending up to $1 trillion modernizing and revitalizing America’s nuclear weapons.

Why did the face in the Oval Office change but the policies remain the same? Critics tend to focus on Obama himself, a leader who perhaps has shifted with politics to take a harder line. But Tufts University political scientist Michael J. Glennon has a more pessimistic answer: Obama couldn’t have changed policies much even if he tried.

Though it’s a bedrock American principle that citizens can steer their own government by electing new officials, Glennon suggests that in practice, much of our government no longer works that way.

In a new book, “National Security and Double Government,” he catalogs the ways that the defense and national security apparatus is effectively self-governing, with virtually no accountability, transparency, or checks and balances of any kind. He uses the term “double government”: There’s the one we elect, and then there’s the one behind it, steering huge swaths of policy almost unchecked. Elected officials end up serving as mere cover for the real decisions made by the bureaucracy.

Glennon cites the example of Obama and his team being shocked and angry to discover upon taking office that the military gave them only two options for the war in Afghanistan: The United States could add more troops, or the United States could add a lot more troops. Hemmed in, Obama added 30,000 more troops.’

Article by By Jordan Michael Smith/Boston Globe


Check Also


Washington report: Russia’s cooperation with Europe – a threat to national security

The cooperation between Russia and Europe is not viewed with approval by the US. It …

Please support the site
By clicking any of these buttons you help our site to get better
Social PopUP by SumoMe