What We Owe To Our Country

 As citizens, we owe the United States a renewed commitment to unity as proclaimed in our Declaration of Independence.

“… we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.”

Okay, I’ll admit that pledge is too big a leap in today’s America!

But are we neglecting the sentiments behind the Declaration? Taking this republic for granted? And choosing to not honor each other? Without an obligation to preserving the idea of being one nation, our republic is definitely facing impending death.

Borrowed from A Republic Production motion picture company (1935-1967)

“… with a population once devoted to national service and personal honor, [the republic] was torn to shreds by growing wealth inequality, partisan gridlock, political violence and pandering politicians … the people … chose to let their democracy die by not protecting their political institutions…” — Historian Edward Watts, on the last century of the Roman Republic

Our nation is suffering from our neglect of it — and each other.

Our Chronic Ills Exposed

In the spring of 2020, the country faltered under a viral infection we knew little about. Many people recognized the preexisting conditions contributing to our inability to respond as a functioning commonwealth. Although we heard — “we are all in this together” —  we weren’t. Thus, already diseased, our dysfunctional nation couldn’t mount a unified defense against a virus.

“Chronic ills—a corrupt political class, a sclerotic bureaucracy, a heartless economy, a divided and distracted public—had gone untreated for years. [So when this novel virus entered the country], the world’s richest power—[became] a beggar nation in utter chaos.”

Now — if we are willing to restore the health of American democracy — we owe it to our country to not simply treat some symptoms but to understand and cure the heart of the disease process itself.

Diagnosed as Political and Social Division

We know what unity feels like; in recent times, we’ve felt it. It was not created by us, but instead resulted from a wound inflicted by foreign terrorists. In that moment, we all shared a sense of shock and sorrow.

“… on September 11, 2001 … Our civic reflex was to mourn and mobilize together.”

Looking back, our sense of unity was short-lived. But it was long enough for political and greed-driven opportunists to take advantage of the crisis. While we were distracted, they used our lawmakers to further their agendas.

Then in 2008, created by lending instruments of financial destruction, and laws designed to allow these practices, the Great Recession hit. But while many low-wage and middle-class people experienced first-time homelessness, Wall Street gamblers cashed-in and walked away. We — the government paid for by the honest — bailed out those “too big to fail” while still digging out of the financial pit they left us in. We were not ALL in that together!

“Partisan politics and terrible policies …  erased the sense of national unity …”

“Inequality—the fundamental, relentless force in American life since the late 1970s—grew worse.”

“The long recovery over the past decade enriched corporations and investors, lulled professionals, and left the working class further behind. The lasting effect of the slump was to increase polarization and to discredit authority, especially government’s.” We Are Living in a Failed State by George Packer, June 2020

In a Vulnerable State

As a federal republic established upon the Rule of Law and a strong central government, it’s our job to ensure laws serve to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” But instead, there is a corrupted ruling-class legally lording over the working-class. That means as much as we all want to believe “all politics is local”, we owe our government a firm resolve to address the sickness that has permeated what Madison saw as the primary position of authority — our Congress.

“… exercise of the different powers of government … [is] … essential to the preservation of liberty … In republican government the legislative authority, necessarily, predominates.” — The Federalist Papers, No. 51, James Madison

If the authority of the legislative branch is to prevail over the governing of our republic, why do we continue to turn a blind eye to what ails it?

What We Couldn’t See Mutated Into Something Else

Based on current global political unrest and research on dead republics, scholars believe when representative governing no long serves ordinary people, populist movements arise. But believing in populism — as acting on behalf of the common people — and actually governing with the people’s needs in mind are two different things. The allure of the concept too often results in violent destruction of a republican form of government with replacement by an authoritarian one.

“Populism is ‘a very complex phenomenon,’ said noted MIT political scientist Richard Samuels …”

“Moreover, Samuels said, the promises of populists during campaigns do not always match the reasons they seek power, making it all the more important to look under the surface of the movement.” 9/16/2019 MIT News, scholars wrestle with the dynamics of a global political trend

We Didn’t See It Coming AND Don’t Understand It !?!

While experts grapple with explaining how populism sounds good but often is disastrous for people and governments, I’m going to take my best shot at explaining how I see things right now.

The rise of populism in the U.S. has all the characteristics of a destructive mass movement.

Emotionally-driven — by frustration, discontent, fear and hatred — yet cultivating within its members — a sense of belonging and power, faith in the future, an “around-the-corner” brand of hope, a willingness to die for the cause —  and is directing hatred towards what the leaders define as “evil.”

For example, look at how Charlie Kirk of Turning Point USA talks —about “liberals”, the “Democrat Party” and his movement— on stage at CPAC 2019.

[They,] “do not have good intentions” — “do not mean well” — [in higher education, they teach there is] “no such thing as right and wrong” [AND] “when we as a movement fight, we win.”

Finally Seeing the Danger

Another warning sign of impending disaster is the level of “preliminary work” done to set the stage for this movement. But don’t think for a minute this is a grassroots effort. The preliminary work was done exactly as outlined by Eric Hoffer in “The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements” (1951) except this movement is sponsored by an elite ruling-class of millionaires and global billionaires—the same ones infecting the heart of our government.

We have to do more than “look under the surface.” But our actions must be guided by the Founding Fathers’ political principles and the institutional goals as designed to protection this republic. We owe it to the republic to avoid falling for authoritarian or totalitarian rule.

But The Disease Will Continue Spreading, For Now

Frustrated by politics, citizens will consume snake-oil if they think it will give them a voice in governing. But what many fail to see is how their emotions leave them susceptible to propaganda. Therefore, what Hoffer called “men of words” are who we need to put under a microscope.

Propagandists targeted — continue targeting — our leadership, institutions, and ethical journalism.

“Mass movements do not usually rise until the prevailing order has been discredited.”

“The discrediting is … [done by] … the deliberate work of men of words … the man of words undermines the established institutions, discredits those in power, weakens prevailing beliefs and loyalties, and sets the stage for the rise of a mass movement.” (p130-131)

Every citizen needs reliable, relevant, unbiased, easy to access information. We owe it to our “Posterity” to renew and strengthen the institutions capable of serving in that endeavor.

Stop the Bleeding While We Administer A Cure

Immediately, we need to demand better information from our institutions, cleaner legislation, and laws ensuring balanced, ethical news sources. Our government owes us that. In turn, we need to become better consumers of news and help others do the same.

Six questions that will tell you what media to trust By Tom Rosenstiel October 22, 2013 (Summary of Six questions that will tell you what media to trust)

And no matter what happens tomorrow, we must protect our educators, librarians, journalists and other writers.

 “It is the writer’s duty, Madeleine L’Engle argues, to continue reclaiming complex ideas from the grip of simplistic taboo…”

“The first people a dictator puts in jail after a coup are the writers, the teachers, the librarians — because these people are dangerous. They have enough vocabulary to recognize injustice and to speak out loudly about it.” From Dare to Disturb the Universe (The Marginalian)

Do We Have A Cure?

Our political and social disorder syndrome manifested itself with these symptoms.

“… a corrupt political class, a sclerotic bureaucracy, a heartless economy, a divided and distracted public.”

But, can we attribute all the symptoms to a single disease process? Well, in this nation of laws, the legislative branch is the heart of the republic. So consider this:

“There’s always been corruption in Washington, and everywhere that power can be found, but it became institutionalized starting in the late 1970s and early ’80s, with the rise of the lobbying industry.”

Source: The [Former] President Is Winning His War on American Institutions  April 2020

We owe it to the country to understand the reasoning behind the design of the American “federal republic”. Understanding the principles and institutions this republic depends upon for survival Is crucial. Otherwise, she dies.

“It is profoundly dangerous when a politician takes a step to undercut or ignore a political norm, it’s extremely dangerous whenever anyone introduces violent rhetoric or actual violence into a republican system that’s designed to promote compromise and consensus building.”

“The solution to keeping a republic healthy, if Rome can truly be a guide, is for the citizens to reject any attempts to alter these norms … [Edward Watts] …” SmithsonianMag

We have to demand a return of function to the heart of the republic.

We owe it to the nation — our United States of America — to make the effort to save her.

Her dome has been maintained and restored. The proper functioning to the institution upon which she stands has not.

The Fierce Urgency of Now

Spoken by Martin Luther King and repeated often, do the words “the fierce urgency of now” no longer stir our souls? Did they ever?

Why the Urgency NOW?

The urgency is the need for all of us to filter out the divisive political language coming at us from all sides. In this moment, we need to look back at what was once only a theory. Now our reality is that economic theory fostered a political strategy to supplant our constitutional republic with “a private governing elite of corporate power.” *Those pushing corporate control understand how essential it is for them to …

“…kill public education because it tend[s] to foster community values…” *

And market-based education reforms became the weapon of choice. But the role of political economist James M. Buchanan is only now being closely scrutinized. Buchanan’s theories explain much about the divisiveness destroying our schools and our nation.

“…[Buchanan] observed that in the 1950s Americans commonly ASSUMED that elected officials wanted to act in the public interest. …[T]hat was a belief he wanted, as he put it, to ‘tear down.’ His ideas developed into a theory that came to be known as ‘public choice.’” *

Public Interest vs. Public Choice

Public interest is defined as “the welfare or well-being of the general public.” It is a national goal clearly stated in the Constitution’s preamble — “in Order to … promote the general Welfare…”.

To “tear down” our assumption that officials are acting in the public’s interest is one thing. To destroy our union is another. That goal does NOT appear to be one of the aims of Buchanan’s original 1986 Nobel Prize winning work on “Public Choice Theory.”

In its announcement of the prize, the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences noted, “Buchanan’s foremost achievement is that he has consistently and tenaciously emphasized the significance of fundamental rules and applied the concept of the political system as an exchange process for the achievement of mutual advantages.Tennessee Encyclopedia (James McGill Buchanan)

His “research program” ** centered on the belief that people make purchases (market choices) based on value. He saw the public making political choices they believed would benefit them. He viewed us as making choices based on our own “venal self-interest.” *

So he and his ilk developed what they called “non-market decision-making.” Finding that name “awkward” and not as appetizing to “free-market” thinkers, the groups’ organization and publications took on the name “Public Choice.” **

Choice or Coercion?

Some researchers believe that Buchanan’s Public Choice Theory began as an “optimistic conception” based on “unanimous consent of the people.” But he later adopted a more “pessimistic view” about “social organization” and people’s “intolerance” to entering into the discussions necessary to reach consensus on issues. Thus Buchanan’s emphasis morphed from “individual freedom” to the need to “enforce order.” ***

As Buchanan explained “Public Choice” to an audience (2003) …

Public choice, in its basic insights into the workings of politics, incorporates an understanding of human nature that differs little, if at all, from that of James Madison and his colleagues at the time of the American Founding.” **

Buchanan wrote that for public consumption. It’s a distortion of history, which is likely being perpetuated through institutions such as George Mason University in Virginia.* And in misrepresenting the American Founding Principles, Buchanan opened himself up to being viewed as a major manipulator in our historic fight against corporate control.

James Madison vs. James Buchanan 

As a key author of the Constitution, Madison left a record of discussions about our nations founding principles. Therefore, a better understanding of the American Founding political views can be gleaned from Madison’s correspondence with a colleague who Buchanan also admired. ***

James Madison to Thomas Jefferson, 17 October 1788 (The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, Julian P. Boyd, ed., vol. xiv, pp. 18-21) …

“With regard to Monopolies, they are justly classed among the greatest nuisances in Government. … Monopolies are sacrifices of the many to the few. Where the power is in the few it is natural for them to sacrifice the many to their own partialities and corruptions.”

Madison went on to express his doubts about a government takeover by monopolies being skeptical …

“…that a succession of artful and ambitious rulers may be gradual & well timed advances, finally erect an independent Government on the subversion of liberty. … Is there not also infinitely less danger of this abuse in our Government than in most others? … with the power as with us is in the manyIt is much more to be dreaded that the few will be unnecessarily sacrificed to the many …”

It appears the expressed sentiment of that last sentence was taken to imply that corporations are the ones in need of constitutional protection from the masses. But Buchanan obviously took Madison’s words out of their historic time and context. Regardless, Buchanan did communicate to the public an association of his “public choice theory” with our nation’s founding principles.

****This quote is from the blog of libertarian economist, Daniel J. “Dan” Mitchell who believes Buchanan’s ideas are being misrepresented.

Same Old Fight: Big vs. Smaller Government?

Not Quite! Think about the following in relationship to the privatization of public education through “school choice” models. The allure of choice is deadly.

With our political choices being analyzed under market-based economic theory, it is assumed people make choices based on their own self-interests — first and foremost. We shouldn’t deny that as a truism. But when market forces —of privatized PUBLIC services or goods— come into play, competition for a limited supply will result in winners and losers. Always does.

We risk having children lose, or never develop, the safe and secure sense of belonging that defines “community values.” When all of us are seen as “self-interested players in the marketplace,” **** we are vulnerable to division. Competition for public services runs the high risk of destroying community values, but that part of the equation didn’t seem to garner much consideration.

Instead, Buchanan saw the need to bring his vision to life by NOT focusing on who rules because who the public chooses doesn’t matter since elected officials don’t act in the public interest anyway. Therefore, this political economist focused on the rules themselves.

“… the Holy Grail was the Constitution: alter it and you could increase and secure the power of the wealthy in a way that no politician could ever challenge.” *

Buchanan found many willing partners.

“Subversion of Liberty”? Translation: Sabotage of Authority

What Madison saw as improbable under our constitutional republic — “a succession of artful and ambitious rulers” changing the balance of power — is exactly what is happening. Our federal government IS under the control of special interests. Many state governments are no different because too many of our representatives ARE no longer serving in the public interest.

The toxic divisiveness of party politics is permeating our communities. The principles of localism and populism, which formed the fabric of our founding documents, are being replaced by corporatism. Thus, when we can no longer reach consensus on the issues that matter, the authorities will step in and set the rules “to enforce order.” ***

This scenario should sound familiar to Baby Boomers. It was a shared American experience on many college campuses during the protests of the 60’s and 70’s. Martial law was declared in many places, which Buchanan supported (at Berkley***). And not to be forgotten were the killing of students by the National Guard. That’s about the time Buchanan’s vision of “unanimous consent of the people” *** seemed to change.

Now? Consider this.

“[historian Nancy] MacLean details how partnered with [Charles] Koch, Buchanan’s outpost at George Mason University was able to …  promote new curricula for economics education, and court politicians in nearby Washington, D.C.”

“… MacLean points to the fact that Henry Manne, whom Buchanan was instrumental in hiring, created legal programs for law professors and federal judges which could boast that by 1990 two of every five sitting federal judges had participated. ‘40 percent of the U.S. federal judiciary,’ writes MacLean, ‘had been treated to a Koch-backed curriculum.’” *

Supreme Urgency?

Think about the urgency demonstrated during the confirmations of both Education Secretary Betsy DeVos and Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Ask yourself, why the fierce urgency?

Think about it. When changing the Constitution is still out of reach, CONTROL of the U.S. Department of Education and having corporate-minded allies on the Supreme Court are a handy pair of tools. Then it requires pushing appeals through the court system to the level of the Supreme Court. Once there, having enough justices interpreting our Constitution and rules in ways that favor corporations and the wealthy is almost as good as a “constitutional revolution.” *

This is no longer just theory and we knew this day was coming. Now …

“We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now.” MLK

Vote, of course.

Is that enough? Absolutely not.

References

* FROM THE LEFT ⇒ Lynn Parramore, “Meet the Economist Behind the One Percent’s Stealth Takeover of America”

**ORIGINAL SOURCE ⇒ James M. Buchanan, Nobel Laureate in Economic Science, George Mason University, “What is Public Choice Theory?”

***STUDY OF BUCHANAN’s EDUCATION SPECIFIC WRITINGS ⇒ Jean-Baptiste Fleury THEMA, Université de Cergy-Pontoise, Alain Marciano MRE, Université de Montpellier, Montpellier, Franc. “The Making of a Constitutionalist: James Buchanan on Education”

**** FROM A LIBERTARIAN VIEW ⇒ Daniel J. “Dan” Mitchell, former senior fellow at the Cato Institute. “A Taxpayer-Funded Smear Job of Professor James Buchanan”