the end of the
18th century, there flowered in America a
remarkable new social order, that altered centuries of
conventional wisdom about how societies should be governed.
Thomas Jefferson said it best, in the very last letter that
he wrote. Jefferson had been invited to attend the 50th
anniversary celebration of American Independence, but he
declined, due to poor health. He died ten days later, on
July 4, 1826, on the same day as his long-time friend, and
sometime political opponent, throughout "the age of
revolutions and Constitutions," John Adams, and precisely 50
years after the signing of his momentous Declaration of
Independence, which forever redefined the Rights of Man.
In his last letter, Jefferson wrote:
"All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights
of man. The general spread of the light of science
has already laid open to every view the palpable
truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born
with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few
booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately,
by the grace of God. These are grounds of hope for
others. For ourselves, let the annual return of this
day forever refresh our recollections of these
rights, and an undiminished devotion to them."
July 4, 2005, marked the 229th "return of this
day" - let us survey what remains of our "undiminished
devotion" to what our Founders bequeathed to us.
The nation created in that age has traveled long down the
path illuminated for it by that truly greatest generation of
Americans. But, somewhere along the way, that light dimmed,
and the nation seems to have lost its way. Raucously
partisan political divisions, what the Founders called
"factions," have been with us since the beginning; in a
nation built on free self-expression and protective of
individual liberty, that was to be expected. Rivalry among
the many different ideas of the good of society has been a
healthy staple of our public life. But over the last half
century, the power of the limited government we created, to
represent us and to preserve our freedom, has grown, while
our individual liberties withered. From whatever ideological
perspective we view the nation today, if we step back from
the daily give-and-take of everyday politics and look around
us, we cannot help but feel that somehow, something has gone
tragically wrong.
One of our most basic rights, our right to speak freely,
to criticize our government, or to voice our opinions, has
been curtailed, especially if those opinions digress from
conventional "liberal" dogma. Just ask any conservative
speaker who has been invited to speak on a college campus;
or a conservative student who dared to disagree with a
left-wing professor. Tom DeLay, a member of Congress, was
accused of inciting violence against judges for seeking the
very same thing that Thomas Jefferson sought many times
during his political life - the accountability of judges, to
the people of the nation.
If, in the course of a discussion about our government,
one were to quote our Declaration of Independence,
"That whenever any form of government becomes
destructive to these ends, it is the right of the
people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute
new government..."
Or quote Jefferson, "I hold it, that a little rebellion,
now and then, is a good thing." Or even, be a bit too
vociferous in criticizing members of our government, he can
be accused of inciting to overthrow the government. After
the attack against the federal building in Oklahoma City in
1995, a radio talk show host was publicly accused of
inciting the attack, by no less than the President of the
United States (who later denied making the accusation). When
the President of the United States makes such an accusation,
with all the power of the government behind him, it serves
as a none-too-veiled threat to ordinary citizens, that
criticism of the government will not be tolerated. We find
similar intolerance from some conservatives, although rarely
from high elected officials.
When our schools are forced to spend billions teaching in
dozens of foreign languages; when even election ballots for
governing our nation are printed in the languages of other
nations; even the most "progressive" citizens, if they care
about America continuing as the United States, and not
becoming an arena of balkanized chaos, must realize that
something is very wrong. We are at war against a fanatical
enemy obsessed with destroying our civilization, and when we
see some of our fellow citizens, and even some of our
elected Representatives give aid and comfort to that enemy;
when we see some of our fellow citizens allowing their
partisan agenda to take precedence over winning the war, and
even manifest a desire to see America fail; when we see our
own government consumed with self-doubt, and condemn our own
forces, because we may have offended our enemy's screaming
mobs, we know that something is very wrong.
When we are reluctant to express our heartfelt beliefs
about the great political issues of our day, or fear to
criticize the functionaries of our government; when we are
inhibited from exercising even our most fundamental human
rights - our freedom to speak our minds openly, our right to
peaceably assemble and criticize our government, our right
to publicly comment upon candidates for our public offices,
our right to freely exercise our religion in public, even
our age-old right to defend ourselves against criminal
depredation - we know that something has gone very wrong in
our nation.
We have arrived at a point in the life of our nation when
we no longer have the ability to govern ourselves, or even
to live our own lives by our own rights, as our Founders
intended. And as time passes, fewer and fewer of us seem to
care, or even know, what has been lost. How did we arrive at
this place?
We didn't object, when judges took from the people the
right to decide the meaning of our Constitution, and began
"discovering" rights that suited them, and ignoring rights
that didn't fit their social outlook. Newt Gingrich calls it
"a proto-dictatorship of the elite, pretending to still
function as a Supreme Court." Judges limit our ability to
defend society by punishing criminals for transgressions
against society; but, at the same time, allow the slaughter
of unborn innocents. Can a society retain its soul, when it
condones the deaths of tens of millions of unborn babies?
When we watch the court-ordered death-by-dehydration of a
helpless, innocent woman on national television? "The courts
say its legal," we tell ourselves - as though that is all we
need to know. History's tyrants usually commit their
atrocities under the duly-enacted laws of their countries,
upheld by their courts. As we should know by now, acting
according to law alone, does not make everything acceptable.
There must be a distinction between "law" and "justice,"
which requires that our laws and courts be guided by a
morality higher than sheer power.
But in our country, neither the people, nor our elected
Representatives, really govern any longer, because judges
have the final say, dictating how we must live our lives. We
came to accept that our Constitution, and our Bill of
Rights, which established our structure of limited
government and were designed to defend our fundamental
rights, don't really mean what they plainly say, because
they are "living" and "evolving" to mean whatever judges -
who are among the very people those documents were intended
to restrain - say they mean.
We are expected to believe that the Founders of our
nation fought a revolution to throw off the bonds of an
unelected and unaccountable King and unrepresentative
Parliament, then voluntarily bound our new nation to rule by
unelected and unaccountable judges. By nullifying laws
enacted by the people, imposing rules never enacted by the
people, even rewriting our fundamental compact, our
Constitution, the judiciary has contravened the very essence
of liberty: that governments derive their just powers from
the consent of the governed.
The Supreme Court invented the doctrine of judicial
infallibility, because its decisions cannot be challenged -
short of amending the Constitution, every time the Court
goes astray, and they can rule far faster than we can amend.
Thomas Jefferson warned us that allowing the judiciary
unbridled control over the Constitution "would place us
under the despotism of an oligarchy" - the tyranny of a
ruling class - which is now becoming reality. Benjamin
Franklin, the wise elder statesman of the revolution, warned
that, "There is a natural inclination in mankind to kingly
government." We now see how prescient he was.
We didn't object, as our Bill of Rights was nullified.
Private property rights, so fundamental to individual
liberty, have been severely eroded, in the name of
environmentalism. The communal ownership of property in the
Soviet Union had proven the Tragedy of the Commons (when
everyone owns something, as private property was held by the
state for "the people," then no one owns it, and no one has
any incentive to conserve it), and resulted in the worst
environmental degradation on the planet.
Yet, environmentalists continue to expand government
control of the use of private property, and thanks to the
Supreme Court, government has the power to simply take
private property, whenever they want, if they think someone
else will pay more taxes. Environmental laws even put land
owners in jail for using their own land, in a way that harms
no one, with no criminal intent, and we don't object. The
ancient right people have always had, to defend themselves,
is gradually taken away, and we are made dependent on the
state, even for our own physical protection. Bowing to
"progressive" ideas, judges release criminal predators into
our midst, and when they continue to maim and kill, it's the
people who try to defend their lives and their families who
are prosecuted. And, we don't object.
We didn't object, when our leaders subordinated our
national sovereignty to foreign organizations, unaccountable
to the people of this country, like the United Nations and
the International Court of Justice at The Hague. We don't
object, as even now, our leaders seek to diminish the rights
of any American who offends a foreign government, or the
United Nations, by replacing our Bill of Rights with the
rules of the International Criminal Court. We didn't object,
when judges began to rely on foreign courts to define our
Constitution. We are the first people in history to
voluntarily surrender our liberty, and our ability to govern
ourselves, to foreign authorities.
We didn't object, when our media stopped being a source
of information, and became an engine to advance a partisan
agenda. Believing we were too self-absorbed to think for
ourselves, they put their hatred of a particular president
above the truth, even above winning a war. And, we weren't
outraged. Our rulers passed laws called campaign finance
reform, restricting our right to peaceably assemble, and
speak our minds as a free, self-governing people. They even
admitted it was needed in order to control their own
corruption, but like sheep, we meekly surrendered our
rights, rather than turn them out of office for their
admitted moral weakness. Our First Amendment plainly says,
"Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of
speech," yet the Supreme Court ruled that these profoundly
improper laws are Constitutional. And, we didn't object.
Voting by people who have no understanding about either
"the true doctrines of liberty, as exemplified in our
political system" (Madison's justification of publicly
funded education), or about the facts that drive current
policy, and have no interest in educating themselves about
either, is praised as a great show of democracy. People who
deem themselves smart enough to govern themselves, don't
believe they need to be able to think for themselves; and
thanks to what now passes for education, have lost the
ability to do so. What did that editorial in the newspaper
say, or what did some late-night comedian say, about this or
that public policy? That's what I think!
Ignorance is the order of the day - and proud of it!
Since our governing class disdains moral values and rules
whichever way the winds (i.e.: the polls) blow, it was
inevitable that the media would start manipulating the
polls, and carefully tailor the "news" to produce whatever
outcome suits their agenda. And sure enough, dubious polls
told us that most people actually wanted the government to
starve an innocent woman to death, actually wants the
government to tell us how it would permit us to save for our
own retirement. With a steady drumbeat of bad news from
Iraq, while ignoring all the good, the media is convincing
people that we should abandon that effort, and hand victory
to our enemies.
Dubious poll "findings" are then declared by the media
and politicians to be the will of the public. And, since we
have elevated moral relativism to a near religion, and are
no longer guided by right and wrong, we find ourselves
drifting with the same prevailing winds, thinking whatever
our neighbors think, which is whatever the polls, the media,
and our politicians tell us to think.