Principalities & Powersnby Samuel Francisn1 he presidential games of 1992 arenwell more than a year away, but wouldbenRepublican gladiators are alreadynrneasuring George Bush for a quicknthrust in the belly. Their plans may benpremature. Though the President camenclose to wrecking his party by breakingnhis promise against new taxes and maynyet make a fool of himself and hisncountry abroad, he is no more seriouslynwounded than Ronald Reagan was inn1982 at a corresponding low point in hisnown presidency. Nevertheless, whatevernhappens between now and the momentnwhen the political swordplay begins, thengames these days seem to produce littlenmore than yawns from the bored andnlargely passive citizen-spectators. Barelyn50 percent of qualified voters botherednto cast ballots in 1988, and the illusionnthat it really matters who sits in thenWhite House is gradually dissipating.nOne reason for the indifference tonwhich slicko is crowned as the nation’snchief executive is that the de jure officenof the American presidency has becomenabout as effective an instrumentnof power as Roseanne Barr would benon a basketball court. Swollen far. beyondnits natural proportions by a century’snsteady diet of the political equivalentnof double cheeseburgers and hotnfudge sundaes, the presidency today nonlonger consists of the individual whonsits in the Oval Office and who spendsnmost of his day in harmless ceremonial.nToday the presidency in fact is composednof pretty much the same sort ofninvisible munchkins who manage thencorporate economy and the labyrinthinencaverns of the dominant culture.nIt is they, and not the occupants ofnformal office or the legal owners ofncorporate stock, who determine how,nwhen, and in what direction the obesenapparatus of power and wealth willnwaddle. The man in the grey flannelnWhite House today confines most ofnhis labors to munching cookies withnvisiting dignitaries, supervising Cabinetnklatches, making periodic forays intonthe wilderness beyond the WhitenHouse gates to receive honorary doctorates,nand threatening foreign tyrantsnwith visitations of globalist brimstone ifnthey don’t forthwith release whatevernYanks have been foolish enough tonwander into their precincts. There isnno doubt that the chief executive stillnperforms such meaningless rituals ofnstate, but the irrelevance of the Presidentnto real power emerges clearlynwhenever word of an Important Decisionnleaks out.nA Cabinet secretary is fired, a SupremenCourt justice nominated, a treatynconcluded, a law proposed, or a warnbegun, and no one, from the humblestnchimney sweep to the most plugged-innpundit in Georgetown, ever imaginesnthat the President had anything to donwith it. Maybe it was the White Housenchief of staff, the secretary of state, thenchairman of the Joint Chiefs, the FirstnLady, the President’s pollsters, thenPresident’s astrologer, or one or anothernof the castrated intellectuals whondecorate the White House court whonactually had the idea and guided itnthrough the paper-clip jungle to thenPresident’s desk. But nobody thinksnthat the President himself conceivednthe idea, planned the strategy, or performednthe work that made the decisionnreal.nOf course, that doesn’t mean henescapes the blame if the act of statecraftnblows up in his and the nation’s face.nOne real function the President stillnretains is to serve as national scapegoatnfor the crimes, failures, weaknesses,nand follies of the executive bureaucracy.nThe contemporary President of thenUnited States does not resemble annemperor of Rome in its last days sonmuch as he does one of the “divinenkings” that the anthropologist JamesnGeorge Frazer wrote about. Chosen bynthe local priesthood to reign for a yearnof splendor and indulgence in everynknown human appetite, the holy monarchnwould eventually be pitched into anvolcano or have his entrails ripped outnto divert the wrath of whatever vengefulngods the Third Wodd of antiquitynadored. But of course, during his yearnof opulence, there was never any questionnof letting his divine majesty actuallynrun things. His only function was tonvegetate in sacredotal luxury until thendread day of atonement fell.nThe engorgement of the Americannpresidency by the managerial priest­nnnhood of the executive branch meansnthat it has ceased to make much practicalndifference which individual or partynholds the office. A new President maynbring new lapdogs to court and his wifenmay order new wallpaper for thenWhite House bathrooms, but the realnrulers, invisible and immovable, neverneven flutter their eyelids when thenbody politic twitches in the quadrennialnpresidential election.nIt follows that conservatives, whonhave dreamed and drooled at the prospectnof placing one of their own in thenOval Office ever since Herbert Hoovernwas defenestrated, ought to find betternthings to do with themselves. In 1980nthey actually thought their millenniumnhad arrived, and indeed Mr. Reagannwas about as reasonable a facsimile ofnthe conservative ideal as the politicalnchemistry of the late 20th centuryncould brew. But, while Mr. Reagannoccasionally voiced inspiring sentiments,nmade a few good appointments,nand even presided over an atnleast temporary economic recovery,nnot even the Gipper succeeded innstaying the course of governmentalnenlargement. When he left office, thenDepartment of Education was evennbigger than when he entered, despitenhis promise to abolish both it and thenEnergy Department, and he evennadded an entirely new appendage innthe form of the Department of VeteransnAffairs to the already bloated federalntrunk.nYet the presidency throughoutnAmerican history has always served asnthe spearhead by which a new elite hasnbroken through the intermediary institutionsnin which an old elite is lodged.nIn the First Republic of the early 19thncentury, the main social conflict wasnbetween, on the one hand, northernncommercial and industrial interests thatnsought to use the federal governmentnto help fill their own pockets andn”develop” the rest of the country and,non the other. Southern agrarian interests,nwhich, to be sure, made use ofnWashington to protect slavery as muchnas possible through the Constitutionnand the Fugitive Slave Law but inngeneral had every reason to keep centralizednpower as limited as possible.nOnce the representatives of the South-nAPRIL 1991/9n