history

by

Face of the Nation II: A Constitutional Crisis

Introduction

Our original Constitution was designed to guard a form of government known as a republic. A republic supposedly protects its citizens against those who would prefer to be rulers rather than representatives. Since the rise of progressivism, culminating in the power of F. D. Roosevelt, the Constitution has been under assault from those who desire a strong centralized form of government. However, while it would be easy to blame progressives in power for the demise of a constitutional republic and the rise of absolute democracy, we the people are as much, if not more, to blame for the condition this nation finds itself.

Government as God

It is difficult to pinpoint the exact time in our history when people’s view of the government changed from that which needed its power to be kept in check to an institution that exists to meet all the people’s needs and desires. Perhaps its historical mark is with FDR, but most likely before when the progressive era actually begin. Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt marked some of the earlier beginnings of progressive ideology. With the rise of progressivism, government came to be viewed as an institution to be commandeered by bureaucratic experts who knew better than the people concerning their needs. However, again, the people themselves had to buy into this notion. Ask people today, particular in the areas of security and economics, when problems arise, then the government should do something. Such a mindset has affected both our domestic and foreign policies. Government is called upon to solve all our problems. From Social Security to DEI regulations, the all powerful State is the panacea needed to create the good life with equity for all.

Constitutional Crisis

In order for the Nanny State to become the all powerful caretaker, the U. S. Constitution as originally written must be undermined or shredded all together. Over the decades, we have watched states’ rights dwindle as the power of the centralized State increases. Rather than allowing states, counties, and municipalities to determine their own laws and regulations, people look to a federal law to commandeer all states. Moreover, there are movements to replace the electoral college with popular vote going the winner of the presidential election. A professor from UC Berkeley, for this very reason, has called for the Constitution to be rewritten. Basically, what this would mean is that New York City, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Houston would elect the president every four years. An absolute democracy is the antithesis of a republican form of government. What centralized planners and absolute democrats are saying is that people in certain parts of the country do not deserve representation. 

Foreign Policy

Under a centralized all-powerful State, a country’s foreign policy turns from defense into imperialistic expansionism. History points this out with Woodrow Wilson’s move to have the U.S. enter W.W. I. Then came FDR’s manipulation that led to U.S. involvement in W.W. II. Historically, the expansionism on the part of the U.S. has continued from the Korean War through Vietnam to Iraq to Afghanistan to the Mideast. Presently, we face a showdown with Russia. Although the progressives from the Democratic Party appear to be the movers behind domestic policy, the Neo-conservatives, found mainly in the Republican Party are the movers and shakers behind our foreign policy. Both parties, however, tend toward progressive measures in both domestic and foreign policies. Listening to the previous presidential debates, one is at a lost in hearing anything that resembles a desire to return the country to a republic form of government. 

Economics of Inflation

Keynesianism is tailored for an all-powerful centralized State. If it’s the government that is to solve all our problems and carve out the good-life for us, then economic-decisions should be in its hands as much as possible. This is accomplished via government spending, whereby bureaucratic government workers and politicians determine how people’s money is to be spent for what. The only problem with this scenario is that the State does not have any money of its own. What it spends it must have already taken from others. Politicians, however, cannot be re-elected if they preach higher taxes. So where does the State turn to obtain more dollars to spend – the government printing press. Consequently, more dollars flood the economy, dollars that have not been produced via entrepreneurial activity, the result being, not only an unfathomable growing debt approaching 35-trillion dollars, but also a cheapening effect on the dollar for which people work. In turn, we see prices go up in every sphere from groceries, to general services, to automobiles, to home costs, etc. At present, the dollar is in a devastating destructive decline. Some countries are already seeking to disconnect their currency from the dollar. The next Federal budget will witness 20% of government spending simply to pay the interest on the debt. As long as people believe that it is the State’s business to solve economic problems, government interventionism into private businesses will continue to grow exponentially. If you are someone who takes a few minutes out of everyday to meditate, reflect on the number 35-trillion, and see if you can actually fathom what that means in terms of dollars and government debt. 

Political Correctness Gone Awry

Anyone who watched the opening ceremonies of the Olympics, followed by a male boxer identifying as a female pound to ground hamburger the female Olympic boxers understands the lengths to which postmodernism and political correctness has taken various cultures. More seriously, such woke-ism is now becoming law per DEI regulations, for now regarding political institutions, state schools, and universities. It could be simply a matter of time before such regulations encroach upon private businesses. We witness the beginnings of this political maneuvering in some large corporations. Additionally, lawsuits attacking Christian businesses, such as bakers and florists, signaled a beginning move in the direction of the State’s dictatorial hegemony over private businesses. Some Christian bookstores have already closed their doors in fear of what DEI regulations may mean for their businesses. 

Conclusion

The previous presidential debates, as well as the two candidates involved, provide no comfort for those who desire the reduction of an ever-encroaching all-powerful State. Both candidates are more than willing to spend other people’s money. Both appear to be too friendly toward the Military Industrial Complex. Although Trump will most likely push back against woke-ism and political correctness, the Republicans surrounding him have shown no overwhelming desire in that direction, save a handful. Both parties are made up of government full-timers that keep their position by spending other people’s money. Until the people of this country decide whether or not they want to live under the Constitution as originally written, we will continue to drift towards an all-powerful State, a failed Foreign Policy, and an economics of inflationism that destroys that for which people work. 

John V. Jones, Jr., Ph.D./September 14th, 2024

ANALYSIS OF POWER

by

The Enemy of Liberty

For they do not speak peace/But they devise deceitful words against those who are quiet in the land (Psalm 35:20).

Introduction

We are in the midst of ideological warfare that could have far-reaching effects for a republican form of government. Note how the mainstream media has become a mouthpiece for the left and its progressive ideology. Pay close attention to those businesses which progressive ideologues have sought to ruin because they dared adhere to their Christian beliefs. The attacks on 1st and 2nd amendment rights never cease. Progressivism is an ideology that holds that a centralized powerful State will bring about a utopia on earth through bureaucratic regulation that threatens what we have typically experienced as liberty. Couched in rhetoric touting democracy, progressivism is a collectivist ideology that views individual liberty as the problem, a problem to be cured by an all-powerful State. Hence comes the movements of Critical Theory, Social Justice, and egalitarianism.

The Rhetoric of Progressivism

The Orwellian speak from the progressive left under the guise of such words as democracy, equality, and peaceful coexistence, is nothing more than rhetoric that they use to push their ideology. First an absolute democracy not checked by a republican form of government becomes rule by the majority. Note the move to eradicate the electoral college and the desire to shift all legal matters away from the states and localized decision making to the centralized government. This was specifically played out in Biden’s move to dictate to the state of Texas its decision on how it should guard and protect its own border. Second, equality of opportunity is not the aim of the egalitarianism of the progressive left. Egalitarianism shares nothing in common with equality of opportunity. Equality of results is the goal of progressive ideology. Individuals by the power of the State will be made equal, whether it be in pay, hiring practices, or educational outcomes. The aim of progressive ideology is to empower the centralized State to force equality of results. Meritocracy is targeted as racist and the result of class privilege. Given this stance, we see the onslaught of Critical Theory and Social Justice ideologies, particularly seizing the academy in all departments. Thus, peaceful coexistence is the last thing that progressives truly desire. Although much of the ideology undergirding progressivism emerges from postmodernism and its claim that all is a relative and a social construct, the true driving force of progressivism is the mantra, everything is political. Given that presupposition progressives will drive home their ideology via political power. Again, we can see this reality in the attacks on free speech and the weaponizing of the legal system to punish businesses that do not adhere to progressive ideology.

Ideological Warfare

Joseph T. Salerno, in his pamphlet, The Progressive Road to Socialism, hammers home that given the ideological presuppositions of progressivism, there can be no peaceful coexistence with the political goals of progressives. The conclusion of everything is political is that political power makes right. Salerno points to the work of Murray Rothbard as a blueprint for how those of us who stand against progressive ideologies should wage ideological warfare. First, we have to recognize that throughout the 20th century, progressives, the academy, and corporatism (corporate cronies tied to big government and the academy) have teamed up to apologize for progressive political aims. The payoff for both the academy and corporations has been subsidies from the State at the taxpayers’ expense. Such politicizing of all avenues of life is not something with which those who stand against progressive policies should seek to coexist, especially if coexistence as defined by progressives means that those who are critical of leftist policies are deemed racist and privileged, basically a move to silence any critical dialogue of progressive policies. Again, note the attacks on free speech. Second, given the political power wielded by progressives, Salerno points out that Rothbard counsels that those on the right must wage a warfare based on ideology that shatters the disguised rhetoric of progressivism, showing that progressive policies will lead to the destruction of a republican form of government, the economic prosperity it brought about, and the end of any sense of meaning of liberty. Salerno, quotes Rothbard: We are engaged in the deepest sense . . . in a “religious war” and not just a cultural one, religious because left-liberalism/social democracy is a passionately held worldview . . . held on faith: the view that the inevitable goal of history is a perfect world, an egalitarian socialist world. . .It is a religious worldview toward which there must be no quarter; it must be oppose and combated with every fiber of our being (p. 18). Salerno, as a libertarian, throws down the gauntlet. He states, There is no middle ground. You are either a progressive or a reactionary. You either join, or acquiesce in, the forced march into socialism or you join the reaction (p.19). Salerno points out that those on the right must recapture the meaning of reactionary, not letting it be labeled as a derogatory notion. This is the game the left plays. Again, note any critique these days of leftist policies is met with the opprobriums racist and privileged.

Conclusion

For the second time in three months I have opened this monthly blog article with an epigraph taken from Psalm 35:20. The question for those of us who are born-again Christians is how we go about the ideological warfare that Rothbard calls for when we are also commanded by Scripture to love and pray for our enemies. First, as a Christian, I hold that we should do as Scripture calls for, love and pray for our enemies. Note however, that in such a commandment, there is no denial that our enemies are just that, an enemy. The progressives do not speak peace (everything is political). Instead they devise deceitful words against those who are quiet in the land. As one who is opposed to an all-powerful and centralized State, I simply want to be left alone by the State, to live quietly in the land. However, there comes a time when it no longer suffices to remain quiet, but to engage the ideological warfare that has engulfed us. As believers in Christ, we must engage that warfare in a way that doesn’t turn us into the likeness our enemy.

Reference: Salerno, J. T. (2023). The Progressive Road to Socialism. Auburn, AL: Mises Institute.

[Joseph T. Salerno received his doctorate in economics from Rutgers University. He serves on the Board of Directors of the Mises Institute where he is also academic vice president and professor emeritus.]

John V. Jones, Jr., Ph.D./ April 14th, 2024

ANALYSIS/Politics