By JIM GENARO

SWANNANOA ­— Not only is the U.S. Constitution inherently undemocratic, it contains built-in provisions that tend to encourage a “slow drift toward totalitarianism,” according to Dr. Frank Kalinowski, a professor of political science at Warren Wilson College.

Kalinowski presented a talk titled “What’s Democratic About the U.S. Constitution” to an audience of about 50 people Sept. 18 at WWC’s Jensen Lecture Hall.

He cited five factors that impede democracy in the Constitution. The first of these is a lack of separation between the roles of chief executive and chief of state, Kalinowski said.

The chief executive, he explained, is the person who administers the government’s affairs. In England, this would be the prime minister.

The chief of state, on the other hand, is a symbolic role — the person who embodies the spirit of the nation. The Queen of England is a chief of state. Importantly, he said, the chief of state is usually devoid of any real authority. Queen Elizabeth, for instance, is not even allowed to vote.

However, in the U.S., Kalinowski noted, the two roles are wrapped up into one office: the president.

“We don’t separate chief executive and chief of state,”  Kalinowski told the audience. “Every president since George Washington has used that lack of separation to say that ‘opposing my government is opposing the country.’”

This forces people into a false choice, Kalinowski said, by equating patriotism with support for the country’s policies.

He criticized WWC students, whom he said possess an “incredible sense of lack of patriotism” because they oppose the actions of the government.

“You should oppose the government because you’re patriotic,” he urged them.

The second inherent flaw of the Constitution, Kalinowski said, is a lack of economic limits. The Interstate Commerce Clause restricts the ability of states to defend their economies, he argued. This essentially creates a “national free-trade zone.”

Furthermore, because of the laissez-faire approach to commerce inherent in the Constitution, the U.S. economy has evolved around a goal of “constant, perpetual economic growth,” Kalinowski added. “On a finite planet, perpetual growth is unsustainable.”

A third flaw of the Constitution is a lack of accountability, he said.

Kalinowski made a distinction between responsibility and accountability. A government can be responsible in the sense that everyone knows who formualtes policies, he explained.

However, accountability implies a mechanism by which those responsible can be punished if their actions are unjust, Kalinowski said.

“North Korea has responsible government, but not accountability,” he noted.

In the U.S., however, even responsibility is difficult to ascertain. An elaborate system of checks and balances “make it very difficult to know who is responsible” for decisions, Kalinowski said.

For instance, while congressional Democrats want to hold President Bush accountable for the war in Iraq, Bush can counter that Congress authorized the war and is therefore equally responsible for it, Kalinowski explained.

The fourth flaw of the Constitution is a lack of political limits, he told the audience.

Here, the problem is rooted in a lack of specificity, which, coupled with a number of Supreme Court decisions and traditions that are not actually mandated by the Constitution, lends itself to abuse and amalgomation of power, Kalinowski said.

The Neccessary and Proper Clause and the Supremacy Clause allow the executive branch to override the rights delineated elsewhere in the Constitution, he said.

“It’s simply a mattter of time that broad interpretation by the Supreme Court” leads to “an inevitable drift toward totalitarianism,” Kalinowski argued. “It’s built into this Constitution.”

The final flaw in the Consitution, Kalinowski said, is that it is fundamentally undemocratic.

The Greek term “demos” means “mob,” he explained Democracy, therefore, means “mob rule.”

“The Founding Fathers were no fans of democracy,” he told the audience. “In fact, they wrote a constitution meant to prevent mob rule — meaning rule by you and me.”

He made a distinction between “strong democracy” and “thin democracy.”

Strong democracy, he defined as “the opportunity for every human being to live out their full social potential ... That is the democracy that the Constitution specifically seeks to avoid.”

Thin democracy, on the other hand, is representative government, in which “citizenship gets demeaned to the simple acts of paying taxes and voting,” Kalinowski said. “This is a view of deomacracy that has a very low opinion of people.”

Kalinowski argued that a serious critique of the Constitution is necessary.

However, he expressed doubts about the effectiveness of the traditional means used to changing it — constitutional amendments and judicial reinterpretation, which are difficult and risky, he said.

Alternately, Kalinowski suggested that the Constitution could be overthrown “through popular uprising — you go out in the streets and you practice strong democracy.”

However, he offered little hope of success. “If you try to use democracy to overthrow the Constitution, you’re almost guaranteed to fail,” he told the audience.

Nontheless, he said it is a cause “worth fighting for.” He cited his own experiences as a young man opposing the war in Vietnam.

“I succeeded at something,” he said. “I changed my life ... I was a right-wing little b-----d. Within four years, I’m in the streets of Washington getting tear gased, trying to stop that war.” He added that that experience was “the thing for which I am most proud.”

Kalinowski closed by saying that the Constitution is “not nearly good enough for the American public.”

After the presentation, Kalinowski answered questions from the audience. A young man asked if he had any hopes or fears about the 2008 presidential elections.

“I’m already bored,” Kalinowski replied.

He urged his audience to vote because “not voting will always be interpreted as consent,” but added, “for God’s sake don’t vote for the Republicans or for the Democrats.”

However, he said he would vote for Al Gore if he ran. He acknowleged that he has concerns about Gore’s mainstream perspective, but added that “he’s the one person who at least ­— at some degree — has some idea what’s happening.”

“Do you have any wisdom about your seven years” of activism, a young man asked. “Where we can go?”

“Strong democrcy starts at home,” Kalinowski answered. “Take over Warren Wilson College.”

However, he said, attachment to the results is futile. “Don’t ask yourself ‘Am I going to succeed or fail?’” he told the student. “You’re most certainly going to fail.”

“Do you have present-day examples of strong democracy?” a man asked.

“There’s always small victories,” Kalinowski answered. “You stop Wal-Marts from moving into some cities.”

He added that these “become spurs to move you forward.”

However, too often people remain satisfied with thin democracy, he said. This settling, he argued, will inevitably lead to totalitarianism.

“Thin democracy is set up for failure and strong democracy is not a sure bet,” Kalinowski said. “The smart money is on some form of Americanized fascism. The problem with fascism is it does work.”

He predicted that “almost everyone in this room will live to see the breakup of the United States,” and that that breakup would come when oil prices top $200 per barrel.

Kalinowski added that while his ideas about the Constitution may seem radical, other commonly accepted ideas — such as women’s sufferage, social security and the abolition of slavery — were viewed as radical at one time.

“The opposite of radical is shallow,” he added.