Montesquieu:
“It is in the nature of a republic to have only a small territory; otherwise, it can scarcely continue to exist… In a large republic, the common good is sacrificed to a thousand considerations; it is subordinated to exceptions, it depends upon accidents. In a small one, the public good is better felt, better known, lies nearer to each citizen; abuses are less extensive there and consequently less protected.’
– The Spirit of the Laws, ch. 16
There is an increasing strain upon centralizing governments, which has two causes: the number of different problems there are to be solved, and the varying suitability of uniform laws to the range of situations in which they are to be applied. This strain scales up in modest proportion to the sheer size of the nation to be governed, but far more sharply in proportion to its diversity.
43 Comments
If we followed the 10th Amendment, much of that “strain” could be alleviated, leaving the federal government to its constitutionally prescribed role and all of the rest to the states.
Your previous post addressed the real structural corrosive and no simple remedy exists to repair our cultural decline.
Dammit, Sir, that fella’ Montesquieu should go far, he’s spot on!
To be serious, since this internet-thingie got going it has provided me with a much more detailed view of America and its body-politic. Not a pretty sight, I’m afraid to say, even just five minutes of the recent Benghazi Congressional circus was deeply depressing. In my inexpert and inchoate way I have been subconsciously thinking that America is just too damn big!
But, hey, that’s your problem, meanwhile ‘over here’ we gave birth unwittingly (well, some knew but kept quiet!) to a monster cuckoo in the nest with the birth of the EU. At least you ‘over there’ have a couple of hundred years or so of practice at trying to run a monstrous, out-of-control behemoth but we don’t.
As always, I try to remain positive and thus I do have one suggestion to offer that might ease the situation both sides of the pond – shoot one in three politicians ‘pour encourager les autres’!
libertybelle has offered a good start at a remedy. I also wonder if a Hillary presidency might allow the virus to finally run its course and take its final resting place of honor in the bottom of a porcelain bowl. The flush handle will take care of the rest.
But alas, Libertybelle, according to Wiki:
“The Supreme Court rarely declares laws unconstitutional for violating the Tenth Amendment. In the modern era, the Court has only done so where the federal government compels the states to enforce federal statutes. In 1992, in New York v. United States, 505 U.S. 144 (1992), for only the second time in 55 years, the Supreme Court invalidated a portion of a federal law for violating the Tenth Amendment.”
The ‘Justices’ are now part of the problem!
David, alas a handful of Black Robed Jacobins have been helpful in our reaching this low point. They are compromised.
Whitewall, Although the benefits won’t be realized until years down the road, saving our future rests on how we educate our children, so wrestling education out of the hands of the federal government would be the first agency I’d target.
“The Children’s Story”, a short story, written in 1964 and made into a short film in 1982, although fiction made me think of how much influence teachers really have at shaping young minds. The videos break the story into three parts: http://stellamorabito.net/videos/
In a much less dramatic fashion here are just two, out of several, small incidents from this school year with one of my granddaughters, that gave me pause on teachers in America.
This granddaughter is 10 and a 5th grader. In her class, all of the students are required to keep a journal where they write about what’s on their mind and their teacher reads their journals. My granddaughter wrote about her 12 year-old sister being mean to her all the time. That journal entry propelled the teacher to send my granddaughter to the guidance counselor to investigate the situation. My daughter was informed, after the fact, and told that the guidance counselor determined that the 12 year-old is going through puberty and advised the 10 year-old on how to cope with the bullying.
The other situation with the same granddaughter involved history. My granddaughter moved from a northern state to GA this summer. My granddaughter told me they are learning about the Civil War and she told me that what she learned here in GA about the Civil War is different than what she learned last year. She said her teacher (in the North) taught them that Robert E. Lee was a sore loser and refused to sit down. I quickly located a link, http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/appomatx.htm, which recounts the scene in the words on General Horace Porter, a Union officer:
“We entered, and found General Grant sitting at a marble-topped table in the center of the room, and Lee sitting beside a small oval table near the front window, in the corner opposite to the door by which we entered, and facing General Grant. We walked in softly and ranged ourselves quietly about the sides of the room, very much as people enter a sick-chamber when they expect to find the patient dangerously ill.”
It’s that easy to create false perceptions in children’s minds. Military historians almost unanimously consider Lee the better general and a gentleman to his core; he was not a sore loser. And, I am a Yankee.
That same granddaughter told me on Sunday that they’re learning about the Spanish-American War and when I asked her where it was fought, she said, “my teacher didn’t go into that much detail.” She handed me her quiz on it, so I believe her. How can you learn about a war detached from its geography?
libertybelle, you are quite right about education and those examples are two of too many. Education has always been a first among institutions the “progressive” goes after. The slow Fabian style changing of history, small events and even vocabulary used to talk about these things is changed into more suitable narratives to undermine the workable and successful society they can’t seem to fit into. We traditionalists have had a culture war waged on our every belief and successful system. I sense our side is beginning to return the favor and wage war against the darkness the “progressive” is attempting to sell as “light”. It will be a long fight as we are coming from behind.
Right on que and compliments of Maverick Philosopher…http://maverickphilosopher.typepad.com/maverick_philosopher/2015/10/victor-davis-hanson-on-the-decline-of-the-west.html
And. Cue up Bill V. queuing up the 10/26 VDH’s first sentence … cue up;
http://nypost.com/2015/10/26/theres-a-feminist-civil-war-brewing-over-caitlyn-jenner/
(& as Duff is wont to say, Grab the sick bag!)
Jacobin’s Whitewall? Ring Wraiths, Nazgal’s of the Jacobin’s and Fabian’s.
Doug, yes Jacobins, sort of left over types from the French Revolution–the big one.
I might point out, Mr. Duff, that we also all speak the same language over here. (Though frequently people define words differently– which has been, of course, the main lever of the American Left ever since Upton Sinclair’s most infamous quote.)
And didn’t someone – Wilde? – say that we are only divided by our common language, ‘Antiquarian’?
Also, please provide the Sinclair quote you have in mind, the man seems to have spent his entire life thinking them up and I haven’t the time to plough through them all!
Try harder, DD. Two in three would be twice as effective. Better still: just shoot the Leftists.
Just to show the school connection, here’s a Stella Morabito article at The Federalist:
http://thefederalist.com/2015/10/27/ask-not-whos-running-for-president-ask-whos-running-for-school-board/
libertybelle, you are quite right that the Tenth Amendment, if it still meant anything, could ease the strain. But after a century and more of steady centripetal movement, I’m afraid the moment has passed.
That is not to say that there are not enormously potent centrifugal pressures building, which soon may manifest themselves with explosive force. But they will have nothing to do with the Constitution.
David,
Well, yes. Even if the United States were as demographically and philosophically homogeneous as Iceland, it would still have difficult, possibly insuperable, problems of scale.
But post-1965 America is, to put it mildly, not Iceland.
I keep telling everyone who will listen that Diversity=Empire. No one does. To support the one is to support the other.
The very anti-definition of empire is written into the Latin root “res publia”, for the public. If you have multiple peoples then you have multiple publics. Thus, you cannot have multiple publics and , still, maintain a republican form of government.
Also, I wonder why your liberal gadfly doesn’t opine on posts like these.
Asher: that would be because refuting right wing agnotology is a never-ending game of whack-a-mole, and I’d rather listen to Mozart’s Requiem (or my desert island musical selection: his Clarinet Quintet in A Major, K. 581). If I took the time to refute every unforgivable howler, shocking distortion, gross absurdity, and shameless offense against reason which the right wing conjures up — many of which are dutifully repeated here — I would never get any work done, see the world outside, or find new and exciting barbecue recipes. From time to time, I’ll find something which so shocks the conscience that it necessitates a response. I’ll leave a post or two and then not return to the thread, as inevitably there would be some other outrage to refute, and I’ll be like Michael Corleone being dragged back to the family business.
For this particular thread, the predicates are all wrong. Montesquieu died when France was a monarchy and America was colonized by the British — had he lived to see the American experiment, I doubt he would have written that.
I believe that we have a beneficent government which does the things it ought to do, functions reasonably well, and is not impeded by scale. I think that the federalist system gets the balance between the federal sovereign and the states just about right. I think that diversity of races and cultures is an enormously good thing, and is accretive, and not dilutive, to American society. I strongly believe that America has never been as wealthy, powerful, just, or moral as it is today, and our best days are still ahead of us.
Of course, these thoughts are heterodox, to say the least, to the right wing, which lives in an alternative universe of unending gloom, impending doom, and — if our host’s predictions about civil strife come true — the sound of boom. Trying to explain that we do not have a tyrannical government about to snuff out the last remaining flicker of liberty, the earth actually is warming, and humanity is in far better shape than ever before — among other obvious truths – is a fool’s errand to a crowd which is heavily invested in the notion that the world is going down the tubes, and the ride’s been great, but it’s over. So I go back to my Mozart instead.
One-Eye shows, once again, that epistemic closure is the default posture of the left.
1. “Trying to explain that we do not have a tyrannical government about to snuff out the last remaining flicker of liberty”
Using the IRS to punish political enemies, refusal to enforce existing law, particularly immigration law, passing an unpopular health-care law with no opposition votes and hilariously using the reconciliation process . . . listen guys, no biggie!
2. “I think that diversity of races and cultures is an enormously good thing, and is accretive, and not dilutive, to American society.”
Liberals ignore Robert Putnam’s findings because there’s really no refutation: diversity and proximity equals low-trust societies and conflict. Diversity and community are mutually incompatible, but recognizing this means that Peter might have to pay someone a living wage to cook his food or mow his lawn. So instead we’re treated to sanctimony instead of reason.
http://mpcdot.com/forums/topic/7684-diversity-vs-community/
3. “I go back to my Mozart instead.” Like a dog returning to its vomit, you can’t stay away.
Asher,
The OEM chooses to make sporadic assaults because his only means of “refutation” is the assertion that he (not the world of intelligent people) is right.
Not only is he monocular, but he also doesn’t have a leg to stand on.
@ oneeyedman
Ah, you believe that the US government is generally beneficent, well run and unimpeded by scale. Fine, but that is entirely irrelevant to the question at hand, which is what is the form of this particular government.
That you want to change the discussion from the realm of “is” to the realm of “ought” is typical leftist intellectual dishonesty. Frankly, every discussion I’ve ever had with a leftist on any topic involved them retreating into intellectual dishonesty.
Look, if your positions were so sound you wouldn’t need to resort to intellectual dishonesty.
@ oneeyedman
That you find this particular government desirable simply means that you think there are good empires, which is the form of the US government. BTW, in your defense of this “beneficent” government do you defend it to other leftists vis a vis it’s policies and positions on multinational corporations and their influence on and behavior toward society?
@ oneeyedman
See, I don’t believe you even really believe what you’re saying. What I suspect is that everything you’ve ever said in the comments section on this blog is simply rhetorical tactics, not actual belief. That you changed the subject from the form of government to whether or not it is desirable is evidence of my imputation to you of purely rhetorical posturing.
Since we’ve established that you are fine with imperialism is there any form of government incapable of being beneficent?
“I believe that we have a beneficent government which does the things it ought to do, functions reasonably well, and is not impeded by scale.”
What is the US debt, approaching 18 trillion dollars?
Ah, yes…. functions reasonably well
Good Lord! A parallel universe. Deliberate dysfunction, breakdown of social building blocks that stand the test of time, flouting the law as long as the media lets you get away with it. The original Star Trek series had numerous episodes about the same people in the same space but living in polar opposite worlds. Science fiction is entertaining, but we are dealing with real world realities. It’s the reality part that the Left doesn’t cope with very well. It is never kind to them when it comes knocking and demands that they too abide what is demanded of others. Amazing.
So true Whitewall, and at some point the rose-colored glasses can no longer shade even the most delusional from the blinding truth.
One can imagine some hearing the music on the deck of the Titanic and believing the ship wasn’t sinking, because after all the music was still playing….
libertybelle..and it is these sorts of people that have our institutions under their control, especially our popular culture and higher ed. I won’t be so crude to ask, but I remember the college world of the late 1960s into the early 1970s and the all out fight for Free Speech on campus. So much so that in 1963, the NC General Assembly passed a law called the Speaker Ban Law. Specifically to ban Communists, sympathizers or anyone similarly unsavory. Well this started a fight among academics and media elites that brought the law to and end in 1968 at the hands of a Federal judge. Fast forward to today, the campus is now dominated by the anti free speech police within the student body and more alarming, among too much faculty and administration. A complete 180 degree turn. An Orwellian turn from freedom to fascism in one generation.
It tells me that the free speech faction has lots of resources available now with the web that never existed before. The anti speech “snow flakes” fall back to the time honored fascist tactic of “shout them down” and shut them down. Dangerous stuff.
I suppose that a thoughtful and well-informed person might plausibly have asserted that the federal sovereignty of the United States is “not impeded by scale” as recently as, say, 1861.
Since then, though, it’s hard to see how anyone might do so with a straight face.
Face it, Malcolm — there is nothing straight about your OEM; least of all his face. He is a poseur with a crooked posture.
I am in frequent receipt of quotations from sundry learned swots and by coincidence this popped into my In-box today:
“It is surely the mark of a sound society that the center of gravity of decision and responsibility lies midway between the two extremes of individual and state, within genuine and small communities, of which the most indispensable, primary, and natural is the family.”
— Wilhem RÁ¶pke, A Humane Economy (p. 164)
And, no, I have no idea who Herr RÁ¶pke is – or was!
And we see why OEM doesn’t comment on threads like these.
Well, if “the earth actually is warming”, that “truth” doesn’t seem to be “obvious” to the satellites that actually measure these things. 18 years and counting.
And if “humanity is in better shape than ever before”, why “back to your Mozart”? Why not your Miley Cyrus?
Look at Europe. I think a lot of people over there would like to go “back to their Mozart” these days, too. (Not the people who are moving in & taking over, though.)
@ Loki
And if “humanity is in better shape than ever before”, why “back to your Mozart”? Why not your Miley Cyrus?
Damn you. I usually catch such hanging curve balls.
“I usually catch such hanging curve balls”.
Catch her and you may need to secretly visit a clinic.
@ Loki
Who knows, maybe in 50 years we will see a society of Islamic Mozart fanatics
And powered by unicorn farts
You bet. Looking forward to The Masjid Flute, The Marriages of Figaro, and Don Jihadvanni.
Wilhelm RÁ¶pke
Looking forward to The Masjid Falafel.
Henry…I hear there will be valet camel parking.
There will be some camel farking too …
And this is why he doesn’t comment on threads like these
Belated thanks, Henry.