Among the many dangers facing America in the twenty-first century, few are more hazardous than its own political system. The two-party system that has been in place for most of our existence as a nation has not served us well. For over a century, we have been moving inexorably toward the abyss of national socialism under the American pseudonym of “progressivism”. It has made little difference which political party has been in power. Under the Democrat Party, we move faster and under the Republican Party, we move slower, but always in the same direction. Now we find ourselves at the very brink of the abyss.
Most Americans have been unaware of the perilous path down which our national leaders have been leading us for many generations. In the 2008 election, voters elected progressive Democrat Barrack Obama as President along with a progressive Democrat Congress. The introduction of one socialist policy after another throughout 2009 and 2010 brought the problem into sharp focus. For the first time in their lives, millions of Americans started paying attention to the direction the nation was going and began weighing the consequences. Anger and frustration have become the normal daily state of an ever-growing number of Americans. The most frequently asked questions are, “what can we do to turn things around?” And, “How can we stop the seemingly unstoppable rush into socialism?”
The Constitution did not create political parties; instead, it created a system of government for future politicians to follow. Political Parties are all about power. Their main objective is to gain and hold power and if they believe that passing socialist legislation is the best way to get or hold that power, so be it. Baron John Emerich Acton wrote in 1887, "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men." In a speech to the House of Lords, Prime Minister William Pitt warned, "Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it".
There are no political figures in America that possess unlimited or absolute power but there are many who aspire to it. In our system, where power comes not necessarily to those with the best ideas, or the best leadership skills, but to those who are able to remain in office the longest, it should be no surprise that corruption is a continuing and growing problem. A system that requires the expenditure of millions of dollars to acquire a temporary job that pays less than two hundred thousand dollars a year is a system that invites corruption. Add to that a regulatory and taxing system that make anonymous and unaccountable bureaucrats the determiners of success or failure in business and you have a climate where corruption is all but certain. Bribing voters with “goodies” from the taxpayer’s till or accepting campaign contributions in exchange for favorable legislation is every bit as corrupt as taking bribes to finance a vacation in the Bahamas.
It is easy to blame Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Durbin, et al. A little reflection, however, points to another mostly unrecognized culprit. As already pointed out, we have been moving in the same direction for over a century. There is not an official in government that has been in office for that length of time. Presidents, Senators and Congressmen come and go while the condition continues to worsen. It is not the people in power that causes our problem— although they are certainly culpable and need to be held accountable — the real problem is the system itself. We have allowed ourselves, over the years, to become subjects of the Republican or Democrat Parties. Every two years we trudge to the polls to determine which of the two parties will rule us for the next two, four or six years.
The Democrat Party is not alone in its abuse of power. The last two elections have shown just how despotic the Republican Party has become. Two examples stand out, the nomination of John McCain for President in ‘08, and in Illinois, the nomination of progressive Republican Mark Kirk for Senate. If you need further proof of the despotism of political parties, consider the bills that were passed and signed into law during the 111th Congress, against the will of the people. If you need still more proof consider the social problems associated with illegal immigration and the resistance of the Democrat Party in dealing with them, particularly in Arizona. Policy Decisions are made by members of the Party establishment and millions of dollars are targeted at the voting public to get them to “rubber stamp” the Party’s decision. All too often it works, albeit often against the best interest of the Country.
We are always going to have political parties and no one would suggest that we get rid of them. However, the Republican and Democrat Parties have become too powerful, have too much control over government at all levels, and have strayed too far from our founding principles, for us to allow the status quo to continue if we are to survive as a constitutional republic. Both parties must be stripped of their power for the good of the country and the survival of the Republic. There is nothing in our founding documents to justify the prominence either Party has in the running of our government today.
Assuming though, that we are successful in returning Congress to some form of constitutional government in the future, then what? Is there any logical reason for continuing support to our current two-party system as it is? Political parties are a lot like service businesses, only with voters instead of customers. The service they provide to the public is finding and publicizing candidates for office.
Conservatives have for generations, given their time and money to the Republican Party with the expectation that its candidates, once in office, would enact legislation designed to protect our liberty and defend our Constitution and way of life. What person, in his or her right mind would continue supporting a business that never delivered the service it had agreed to provide?
Who would patronize an airline that never took them to the destination their ticket called for? Who would continue to employ a security firm to protect their business if thefts kept increasing year after year? That is exactly what we are doing with the Republican Party. Conservatives keep volunteering their time and donating their money, yet they never get what they work for and pay for. We have been conditioned to believe that strong political parties are necessary for the functioning of government. That may be true — but, we need to reexamine that assumption and, at a minimum, rethink what it is that we want our political parties to do for us.
There is no legitimate reason, based on our Constitution and founding documents, for allowing political parties to exercise the amount of power they have today over our government and the choice of leadership we have as citizens. When the Founders were designing our government with its balance of power, they designed it to balance the powers between the different branches of the federal government and between the federal government and the states. They did not and could not have envisioned that the stability of our nation and the security of our liberties would one day depend on a balance of power between two political parties.
The power of political parties has increased concurrently with the decline of federalism in our national government. The founders did not establish the United States as a consolidated “nation state”. Following the Declaration of Independence, a federal government was established by the Articles of Confederation, as a federation of nation states, primarily for the purpose of mutual defense and international relations. The nature of the United States is described in the final paragraph of the Declaration.
“…These united colonies are and, of right ought to be free and independent States;…that as free and independent States, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent States may of right do.”
This is the last occurrence of the word “colonies” in the official documents of the U.S. From that time forward, citizens of the various states considered their state to be their “country”. Whenever the word “country” appears in the personal writings of that era, it almost always refers to an individual state, rarely to the “United States” as a whole.
The Declaration declares the states, in their individual capacity, to be free, independent, sovereign nation states, equal to any other nation state such as Spain, Great Britain, Germany, Poland, etc. It does not present them merely as parts of a larger consolidated “nation state”. Later governing documents, based on the Declaration of Independence, does not change the fundamental nature of the states as described in the Declaration. The essential and fundamental nature of the states in their declarations of independence, and in their successive governing documents is state sovereignty and independence.
Articles of Confederation
After the Revolutionary War began, recognizing the shared threats to the individual states posed by other nations, and a common interest of the states in a few other issues, an “umbrella” government was organized for the common defense and certain other matters of common interest. The Articles of Confederation, ratified by the states in 1781 describes this federation as,
…“A firm league of friendship with each other, for their common defense, the security of their liberties, and their mutual and general welfare, binding themselves to assist each other, against all force offered to, or attacks made upon them, or any of them, on account of religion, sovereignty, trade, or any other pretense whatever.” (Article III)
To preclude any attempts by the Federation to impinge on the individual sovereignty of the various states, they included this statement in Article II:
“Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.”
With the Articles of Confederation, the states relinquished a small portion of their sovereignty to the “umbrella” government, namely, the powers of war and peace. All other powers were retained by the states. Our second governing document, the Constitution of the United States, did not alter the fundamental sovereign nature of the states. The only additional sovereignty, of any consequence, relinquished to the federal government was the power to tax rather than requisitioning the State Legislatures for the monies necessary to administer the federal government; granting the federal government the right to regulate interstate commerce to insure free trade between the states; coin money; operate the postal service; the establishment of a national judiciary, and a conditional power to make treaties with other nations. Other than that, the states retained their full sovereignty.
By either malicious intent or oversight, the statement of sovereignty contained in the Second Article of the Articles of Confederation was omitted from the Constitution. However, it was added at the insistence of the Anti-Federalist, with the Ninth and Tenth Amendments ratified in 1791.
Amendment 9: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” Amendment 10: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Growth of Political Power
With the formation of the political parties soon after the inauguration of George Washington, the power of government began slowly to shift from the states and the people to political parties. For the past hundred and eighty-five years two major political parties have competed with each other for the reigns of power.
Party power has increased until today it seems to many that we are ruled over by an oligarchy, consisting of the Speaker of the House, the Majority Leader of the Senate, the President, and the so-called “swing vote” of the Supreme Court, each representing the needs of their respective parties rather than the needs of the people and the states.
Lip service is given to the “sovereignty of the people” by allowing them to choose which of the two political parties will rule over them until the next election. The constitutional form of government established by the Founders has all but been forgotten. If we are ever to regain the liberty and freedom left to us by the Founding Fathers, it is imperative that we throw off the power exercised over us by political parties.
Political parties are a natural consequence of government, whether in a democracy or a dictatorship. The power exercised by those parties depends, for the most part, on the type of government a nation has. Totalitarian governments usually have a single, all-powerful party exercising power as an oligarchy. Democracies have a multiplicity of parties, each representing the variety of views within that democracy. Governments exist on a continuum between anarchy and despotism.
Total Dem. Rep. Constitution No Gov. Socialism Party Party Conservatives Government l__________l___l_____l____l__________l___________l l l l l Despotism Fiscal Libertarians Anarchy Nazism Conservatives Communism Fascist
Political parties and the worldview of each individual within a party exist on the same continuum, depending on their degree of preference between no-government and total government. Contrary to popular belief, anarchy is located at the extreme right with despotism at the extreme left. Today’s Republican Party is located slightly left of center. The Democrat Party is located still further left, just barely to the right of socialism. Constitution conservatism is located center right with fiscal conservatives to its left and libertarians to its right.
E-mail address email@example.com
Philosophy of Evil Socialism in America
"The struggle of History is not between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat; it is between government and the governed."