The Flawed Elite: Why the US Sees Presidents as Celebrities
With a fascination for celebrity presidents, the United States has a unique cultural obsession. Celebrities, often revered by the public, often hold them as figures who are inherently better and more important than the average citizen. This reverence for fame, however, can blur the line between entertainment and politics, leading to a system that prioritizes public recognition over substantive leadership qualifications.
America's Unique Political System
It is important to note that the American fascination with celebrity presidents is not unique. Many countries around the world also require a popularly recognized political figure as their head of state. However, the US system is particularly flawed when it comes to social education and political representation. Without a proper understanding of the democratic process and the role of the president, the public often looks to celebrities for political figured.
This phenomenon is exacerbated by the poor social education system, which fails to provide a balanced view of political figures. As a result, the average citizen may find it difficult to relate to or trust a political identity that has not been presented to them through the popular media. This creates a cycle where celebrities are sought after as presidents, despite their lack of political experience or qualifications.
Alternatives to a Populist Head of State
To avoid this problematic system, several alternatives have been proposed. One such alternative is a constitutional monarchy, where the monarch is hereditary and has no political involvement. Other countries in the Commonwealth, like the United Kingdom, operate under this system where the viceregal representative, typically a Governor General, carries out the monarch's duties.
An alternative to monarchy is a republic, where the head of state is elected or appointed by the parliament and is not allowed to participate in politics. This ensures that the head of state remains a figurehead rather than an active political force.
The Monarchist System and Its Benefits
In both a constitutional monarchy and a similar republican system, the head of state (HoS) effectively holds the power to make all parliamentary decisions legally binding through their signature into law. They also possess special reserve powers that can be invoked in times of political emergency. For example, in case of a government collapse or unworkability, the HoS can dissolve the government and appoint a caretaker government, calling for elections at the earliest possible time.
This system, employed by several Commonwealth nations, offers a solution to the current US system. By not allowing a populist head of state, these nations avoid the pitfalls of a celebrity president. While there may still be obnoxious individuals within the parliament, the lack of a popularly elected HoS means the public can quash these individuals without resorting to populist rhetoric.
Conclusion: A More Stable Presidential System
The US system, with its celebrity presidents, is a prime example of how not to structure a republic. A head of state who is not an egotistical arrogance can bring much-needed stability and reduce political division. It is crucial to rethink the role of the head of state and ensure that the individual holds a position that is symbolic rather than a political figure who runs against the government.
By adopting a constitutional monarchy or a similar republican system, the United States could create a more stable and balanced political landscape. This would enable the public to view their leaders in a more mature and critical light, promoting a healthier and less celebrity-driven political culture.