My Commentary for the Week.
These last few weeks have been a trying time on the Administration. Every administration has its scandals, and its detractors. The Left calls it bogus and the Right calls it a cover up, or vice-versa. To make it easier to swallow, imagine it is a Republican administration. Does it make it any more palatable? No.
First off, let’s stay away from the “Well, Bush was a criminal” voices, and let us stick to the current Administration.
Obama would have us believe that government is good. That it can service the People if we just stop putting roadblocks in the way, say, for example, the Constitution. This is a change from the mindset of 30 years ago, when We the People, and the people we voted for, acknowledged that government, as a rule was a necessary evil, that we had to always balance our libertarian ideals with republican virtues. (I trust the reader knows I refer to the construct and not the political party).
What many do not get, and the irony escapes me as if one studies history, one would see that there is data to support the claim that All men are corruptible, and not infallible. Gathering men together into an organization, does not make this less true; rather it compounds it.
I see the “Right” or, or more aptly, those that distrust government, not paranoids, but rather, logical and realists, in the sense they have history and data to realistically support them and their supposition. They understand Human Nature. And let us get this out of the way now. I’m not speaking of the individuals that are against gay marriage, or anti-drugs. in the scheme of things, this is minor. I speak to the deeper, and more substantive core.
We ask, “Our leaders govern, but who governs them?”. 30 years ago, his was a good trait. Today, even the press, the Fourth Estate, is complicit in pushing ideology instead of being the guardian of liberty in a Republic.
Even our definitions have changed. In the past, Equality, was the natural right of every individual to live freely under self-government, to acquire and retain the property he creates through his own labor, and to be treated impartially before a just law, as defined by Mark Levin.
Today, it is confused with “Popular Sovereignty”, or “Social Justice”.
Alexis de Tocqueville had it right, when he said, “The evils that extreme equality may produce are slowly disclosed; they creep gradually into the social frame; they are seen only at intervals; and at the moment at which they become most violent, habit already causes them to be no longer felt”
Equality of the general rules of law and conduct is the only kind of equality conducive to liberty and the only equality which we can secure without destroying liberty. Not only has liberty nothing to do with any sort of equality, but it is even bound to produce inequality in many respects. This is the necessary result and part of the justification of individual liberty: if the result of individual liberty did not demonstrate that some manners of living are more successful than others, much of the case for it would vanish. Friedrich Hayek had this most correct.
This comes to the summation of my opinion: The saw tilts, as the definitions change. 238 years ago, the Founders had it correctly on understanding Human Nature, and nothing is new under the sun, as they say. The things they feared most; a disinterested and an uneducated peoples, mob rule, and a public that could vote themselves wealth, that would be the downfall of our Republic, are coming to pass now.
Remove the labels, use common sense, and logic, reasoning. Reclaim your Republic.