4 years have passed
Jun 7th, 2008 by David Anderson
President Ronald Reagan passed away 4 years ago on 4 June 2004. I think his quote from 1964 is true today, “This is the issue of this election: Whether we believe in our capacity for self-government or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess that a little intellectual elite in a far-distant capital can plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.”
Do they make them like that any longer?
Liberty, fraternity and equality are the basis of all real self government. An elite of the political class, business class, or the dominion of their agents over the minds of men, is not condusive to self-government. It tends over the course of time to concentrate power in an elite (sometimes said to be the chosen of God) and erode the hard won liberty and hope for equality among the many.
You know who told me that? My grandfather’s friend Richard DuPont.
Cool, thanks for contributing Brian. You always add something of value.
Ronald Reagan was a Cold War era orator. Much of what he preached was aimed at debunking the concept of totalitarianism as practiced in the Communist world the he (we) so detested. His fear, along with that of most of his compatriots, was that Communism would win.
It is a mistake to apply Reagan’s Cold War rhetoric to our American Government. The threat of a communist USA no longer exists. The challenges that face us today or much less epic, much more practical.
At issue is not too much or too little government control, but rather simply sorting out which government polices work and which do not. The less we rely on ideology the better off we will be. That is the real lesson we learned from the fall of communism. The Marxist governed by rigid adherence to ideology regardless of outcomes. We have started down that slippery slope ourselves with a foolhardy fiscal policy based of ideology rather than numbers. Reagan was above all a practical man.
Don in order to acheive humanistic pragmatism we need to drop the ratio systems and mathematical thinking for what are philosophical and social problems. That means we look at the financial fundementals and we ensure that we respect our tradition of liberty. All the while keeping a close eye on the national check book to ensure we get what we pay for and are not losing our shirts. I am sure that my generation is going to pay for the excesses of yours and some have even paid with their lives to serve this nation. I would prefer it if we kept our eyes on the national check book and returned our national purpose through having faith in the common people and our founders.
Don, while I agree that the world is different than during the cold war, I couldn’t disagree with you more that threat to American freedom is any less. Ideas matter. When someone tells you we don’t need ideology, they are trying to tell you that you can travel without a road map. A pragmatist may be able to get you across town but they can’t get you across the country by roads.
The problem is not that we are too rigid in ideology. The problem is that we don’t follow our free market, free people ideology closely enough. We jump around taking something from the socialist handbook and something from the market handbook and wonder why we have a mess. It is like mixing salt water and fresh water. You have to choose which you want more because you cannot have both in the same container.
["Liberty, fraternity and equality are the basis of all real self government."]
That was the mantra of the French Revolution, when a mob became judge, jury and executioner. The resultant government failed and led to Napoleon’sw dictatorship and years of war in Europe.A soliod constitution is more important for long-term stability than well-intentioned ‘feelings’ or slogans.
[" An elite of the political class, business class, or the dominion of their agents over the minds of men, is not condusive to self-government."]
The Founders were themselves a political ‘elite,’ many of whom had an open contempt for the judgement of the masses; hence, a republic rather than a democracy. Unfortunately, a nation addicted to sitcoms, pornography and fake news doesn’t notice the destruction of the Constitution by our ‘leaders.’
“The Founders were themselves a political ‘elite,’ many of whom had an open contempt for the judgement of the masses; hence, a republic rather than a democracy.”
True. And we fight this battle against the ruling ‘elite’ to this very day, made worse than ever by the Cheney/Bush administration!
It was significant the other day that Obama proclaimed that his campaign would accept no contributions from lobbyists or PAC’s, in other words, those who represent the wealthy ‘elites’, enabling them undue influence in our government.
That’s change!!!
Unfortunately, a nation addicted to sitcoms, pornography and fake news doesn’t notice the destruction of the Constitution by our ‘leaders.’
…ummm, the “fake news” is the only media that HAS been reporting the destruction of the Constitution (apart from the blogs).
And the conservative FOX network is responsible for more porn and sitcoms than anybody. Probably to distract from the destruction of the Constitution.
the destruction of the Constitution
It is truly amazing the asinine hyperbole from those who obviously know little history.
David, I’m not sure about your – we are not following our free market ideology enough – theory. We had two centuries of that. Ever since we changed to regulated Capitalism things have been much better for the vast majority of Americans. Why push for a return to a system that did not work as well as what we are currently doing?
Case in point, the “free market” has invited a new breed of supersized commodity traders into oil markets. Because of this, the price of oil has become delinked from supply and demand. It’s killing the prosperity dream for billions of people. The only ones benefiting from this “freedom” to trade huge sums in oil futures are the very few who have the hugh sums. Soon there will be a call to restrict this kind of abuse. Is that a violation of the free market? Or does the freedom of one hundred traders come before the well being of a billion humans? You seem to have blind faith that as long as everyone is “free” everything will turn out the way it should. That is the easy way out. Just sit back and watch, as if we not permitted to control our destiny.
Wrong, it is the free market and sovereignty of the individual which allows you to control your destiny. Central planning prevents it. Those two centuries saw us go from a backwater to the greatest nation in history. Yes, the government should let people work and use their ingenuity to solve problems. The government does its best at creating them.
David, the truth is the government solves far more problems than it creates. Once you accept that reality, you can begin to feel comfortable living in the modern world that.
Government has solved huge problems in America. Without the big powerful government our Constitution calls for, America would likely be a terrible place to live for the average person. The real ascendency of the USA as a superpower came about in the past sixty years. One memorable bit of “central planning” was the abolition of slave labor. You can not run a Nation on feel good philosophies like – government is bad but individuals are good. Our government is not the enemy of the individual. The American government is the enabler of the individual. Next time somebody wants to buy and sell people as slaves, tell ‘em that as individuals they should be able to work it all out without Government interference. Or if some guy in China want to paint your kids toys with arsenic, work it out yourself as a self sufficient individual.
Don,
Federalism is a little different from centralization. If we start down the road of five year plans and ten year plans without allow the individual states to have a role it is a problem.
The other thing is that the things the government should be concerned with, like keeping taxes low, services high quality and consumer protections up, and white collar fraud down they have not been doing. Also there has been a marked erosion of our civil liberties that is troubling.
What we have to focus on in my view, is the principle that government governs best when it encourages the ability of the individual. It is the release of human potential that defines democracy.
Rick, the founders were elite, but let’s not think that they wrote laws for the elite. They wrote WE the people, not some of the people, not the best people, not the highest people, all the people. They wrote the laws in common language for the common man. A far cry from the thousands of volumes of compromise legislation and blue ribbon committee work we have today.
“The real ascendency of the USA as a superpower came about in the past sixty years.”
America’s power is in decline; we are rapidly becoming a nation of semi-illiterate TV addicts.
["the destruction of the Constitution
It is truly amazing the asinine hyperbole from those who obviously know little history."]
Try reading Article I., Section 8., Mr Historian…….including Madison’s Federalist explaining why.
Re; Article I., Section 8. (The Powers of Congress)
Federalist 41, Madison;
“It has been urged and echoed, that the power “to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,” amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given of the distress under which these writers labor for objections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction. Had no other enumeration or definition of the powers of the Congress been found in the Constitution, than the general expressions just cited, the authors of the objection might have had some color for it; though it would have been difficult to find a reason for so awkward a form of describing an authority to legislate in all possible cases. A power to destroy the freedom of the press, the trial by jury, or even to regulate the course of descents, or the forms of conveyances, must be very singularly expressed by the terms “to raise money for the general welfare. “But what color can the objection have, when a specification of the objects alluded to by these general terms immediately follows, and is not even separated by a longer pause than a semicolon? If the different parts of the same instrument ought to be so expounded, as to give meaning to every part which will bear it, shall one part of the same sentence be excluded altogether from a share in the meaning; and shall the more doubtful and indefinite terms be retained in their full extent, and the clear and precise expressions be denied any signification whatsoever? For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power? Nothing is more natural nor common than first to use a general phrase, and then to explain and qualify it by a recital of particulars. But the idea of an enumeration of particulars which neither explain nor qualify the general meaning, and can have no other effect than to confound and mislead, is an absurdity, which, as we are reduced to the dilemma of charging either on the authors of the objection or on the authors of the Constitution, we must take the liberty of supposing, had not its origin with the latter. The objection here is the more extraordinary, as it appears that the language used by the convention is a copy from the articles of Confederation. The objects of the Union among the States, as described in article third, are “their common defense, security of their liberties, and mutual and general welfare. ” The terms of article eighth are still more identical: “All charges of war and all other expenses that shall be incurred for the common defense or general welfare, and allowed by the United States in Congress, shall be defrayed out of a common treasury,” etc. A similar language again occurs in article ninth. Construe either of these articles by the rules which w ould justify the construction put on the new Constitution, and they vest in the existing Congress a power to legislate in all cases whatsoever.”
If memory serves me correctly, don’t we consider Madison to be the ‘father of the Constitution?’ These are his words, contemporary to the time of the Founding.
Don, how did we survive without government protecting us from every ill? Now that we have government taking care of us, we no longer die. I am so glad. I don’t see many problems solved by government. I see a lot of action and few results.
I think the problem with the toy situation is that we depend on government when it is either not willing or not capable of these inspections. If it were a private responsibility with huge liability riding on the outcome, every toy would be inspected. Your example shows the incompetence of government. It doesn’t build my faith.
Your slavery example is even worse. It was the government which kept slavery alive through the Fugitive Slave Laws. It created the problem you wish me to congratulate it for solving. The government had the blood of the slave on its hands and was obligated to make it right.
You know that I believe government matters. I have written about how important of an institution that it is. I also have pointed out that the other 4 institutions are just as important: faith institutions, family, business, and community service organizations. Government has helped us. Food safety standards come to mind as well as dozens of other areas. The problem is that when it loses focus and tries to do everything, it does nothing.
When I speak up for limited government, I stand for effective government. They go hand in hand.
David, on toy safety you say “If it were a private responsibility with huge liability riding on the outcome, every toy would be inspected. Your example shows the incompetence of government.” Who would establish that “huge liability”? I guess it would be the government who makes the laws, no? As far as your claim regarding slavery, c’mon . . .without strong government intervention individuals would still be putting up whites only signs in their hotels and restaurants. There are lots of evil anti social individuals out there, we keep them in the government prisons.
Rick, Madison was undoubtedly a great guy. Our founders left us a constitution that has been amended many times to conform to modern times. We changed the age, color, and sex of who can vote, set term limits for Presidents, restricted Congressional pay raises, outlawed poll taxes, made it so US Senators have to be elected, created an income tax, etc. That Nation evolves from the day of Madison. We are a much better place than back then. As far as your claim:
“America’s power is in decline; we are rapidly becoming a nation of semi-illiterate TV addicts.” If you check the actual facts, you will find the literacy rate in America is at an all time high. Thanks to television and the internet and public education the American people have never been better informed or smarter. That is why we lead the world in almost every area of modern technological breakthroughs. I doubt a nation of semi-illiterate TV addicts would be fooling around with robots on Mars. Find some harmony in life. America is a wonderful place. I feel bad for the “down on America” folks like you. Madison, who lived in a time when families were destroyed by the most basic diseases, children dead from measles and chickpox, fathers and mothers dying from unsanitary conditions, Madison never envisioned a Federal Center For Disease Control, but thanks to the framework he and the others left us we have done miracles through the benevolent hand of Government.
Don, the role of government is to insure people are free from fraud, theft, and force. Naturally, if someone markets something as safe and it is poison, they should be accountable and if it is intentional, criminally accountable. Government does a better job than any institution at providing that kind of protection. It is one of our most valuable institutions. One of the top 5 ever devised by man. The fact is that it can also do great harm. It is like a fearsome watchdog. If not controlled….
Government does a lot of good things. I freely say that. You have a problem in admitting that government can also do great harm. The history of the world is littered with corpses from tyrannical government. It is either your best friend or worse enemy. You have to set boundaries and enforce them or else government grows out of control.
David, I agree with the sentiment of your last post. As you know, my thing is to call out the phony cliches we conservatives accept as true, even when they are not. So when people say we are a nation of tv addicted illiterates, or government messes up everything it touches, or America would be better off if there was no government regulation, or our growing Nation needs a smaller government, or “trusting the individual” is an actual viable governing philosophy, I say stop with the cliches, give examples facts and figures to show how any of these empty slogans apply to our modern world.
Our political language has evolved steadily from the time of the founders. It needs to keep changing. Many of the slogans used here to bad mouth government are from an era that has passed. Even solid old bromides like government that governs least governs best is not entirely applicable to the age we live in. It could be said that in the technological age, government that governs smart governs best. Just as simple a thought, but more in tune with the reality of sorting out things like auctioning off wireless bandwidths, and controlling genetic science products.
Now if you say we have to watch out for tyranny, for exploitation by either government or industry, sure, that makes sense. Just don’t tell me we were better off before Social Security, EPA, FCC, FDA, FBI, and all the rest of the great institutions we individuals, acting collectively created in the past century. I think it is too egotistical to say we are the Greatest Nation On Earth, but we do have a damn good thing going on here in America. God gave us the freedom to control our destiny. That is what we have been doing since day one. We get better with every generation.
“But what color can the objection have, when a specification of the objects alluded to by these general terms immediately follows, and is not even separated by a longer pause than a semicolon? If the different parts of the same instrument ought to be so expounded, as to give meaning to every part which will bear it, shall one part of the same sentence be excluded altogether from a share in the meaning; and shall the more doubtful and indefinite terms be retained in their full extent, and the clear and precise expressions be denied any signification whatsoever?”
I’ve argued this point with Rick before and I still don’t agree with Madison’s argument. Additionally, I find to be beside the point.
Madison is basically stating that Congress’ spending power is for the “general welfare” is modified by the clauses that follow it.
This is the language of Article I, Section 8:
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;
To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;
To establish post offices and post roads;
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;
To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;
To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
To provide and maintain a navy;
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;–And
To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.
I don’t read it that way. It comes down to basic grammar. The clauses are each separated by semi-colons. At the time of the drafting, as now, a semi-colon is used to set off independent but related clauses.
Therefore, a reasonable person could read “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States” as an independent clause, as the Supreme Court does.
As stated, Madison’s argument is that the semi-colon is not a semi-colon, that the initial clause of Article I Section 8, cannot stand on its own. Madison would have us construe the document this way “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States:” There the initial clause is followed by a colon after which related clauses modify and restrict it. That would support the meaning that Madison argued in support of but that is not how section 8 is drafted.
This was decided around 80 years ago by the Supreme Court. It is an issue on which reasonable minds can and do differ, but it is not, as advertised by the resident propagandist, an example of the destruction of the Constitution.
It is a law that is ambiguously structured as is evinced by the fact that one of its authors was compelled to write an essay interpreting what should have been stated in plain english in the law!
Don- I have an example for you. 7 million people disappeared from the federal census during the Great Depression. You know what happened to them? They starved to death or died of disease and malnutrition.