By Dr. Earl R. Smith II
Chief@ComeOnSense.com
www.ComeOnSense.com
There is a difference between freedom and liberty which seems to be lost on the current generations of Americans. For many the words seem to be synonymous. But nothing could be farther from the truth. It is true that, from the perspective of the draft animal – the oxen, for instance – the words may seem to have the same meaning. But Americans should not be oxen.
There is a view of society which promotes the equivalence of the terms – here I shall call them the Hegelians. They believe that the state is the supreme authority and sole source of sovereignty. Within such a state subjects – for they are certainly not citizens no matter what the political scientists and professional politicians decide to call them – gain their freedom by allegiance to and subjugation to the state. An individual who pledges such fidelity is then free to do as they wish within the limits that are laid down before them. They can, for instance, say what they please as long as it agrees with the dogma approved by the state. But their freedom only extends that far. Should they presume to true liberty and dare to state an opinion which is at variance with that dogma, they are quickly branded ‘agitator’ or ‘traitor’ or ‘unpatriotic’ or worse. In a Hegelian society the subject should be – and indeed most often is – afraid of their government.
Our times are rife with such Hegelian examples – where men and women of honor and thoughtfulness who do dare to speak their own minds are be told – sometimes forcefully and with thinly veiled threats – that they are ‘out of line’ and beyond their rights in a ‘free society’. Free speech is a pale thing indeed in the face of Hegelian political correctness. The presumption of the Hegelians is that they build the maze and the rat – so long as it keeps within the proscribed course – if completely free. Such is Hegelian freedom – the freedom of a rat in a maze.
And what of Hegelian liberty? Such a narrow concept in fact. By their lights the individual has only two choices – to submit or face excommunication – to be branded with the Scarlet A – which marks the Anti-American. Such liberty is an either or affair. Submit and be free or rebel and be attacked and slandered. You are at liberty to choose.
Is it no wonder that men and women of honor and thoughtfulness avoid all engagement with politics in America? Such a dirty and corrosive business it has become. For how should such men and women behave towards the American government when they cannot but with disgrace be associated with it. Should they seek to engage on their own terms, they would be not so gently pushed aside and reminded that they are a slave to the state.
Another view of society makes a great and defining distinction between freedom and liberty – I will call them the Lockeans. Like their progenitor, they accept the proposition that the authority of the government rests upon the popular consent and that the people are the source of sovereignty. In their view rebellion is not only permissible but essential when government subverts the ends for which it was established. Within this view, an engaged and empowered population is a citizenry no matter what convention has decided to call them. Within the Lockean perspective, freedom means that a citizen is left alone to pursue their inalienable rights – free from government interference. Individuals have a right – indeed a duty – to express their opinion – by whatever method is available to them – without risking either the threat of or actual oppression by their government. The Lockeans believe that social discourse is the wellspring of a healthy society and that the battle of ideas among the people is the great flywheel of democracy. Within this vision it is the government which is in the maze – a maze built by the citizens – a maze which is designed to contain and control the negative tendencies of that institution.
These two views of society represent the distal ends of a history of the United States of America. The latter – Lockean – perspective is where we started as a nation while the former – the Hegelian – is a fair description of where we have ended up towards the end of the first decade of the 21st century. This journey – which accelerated greatly during the 1960s – can be understood by considering the presidents which this country has elected from John F. Kennedy on. There is one critical characteristic which all – with the possible exception of one – have had – whether they were republican or democrat – and that is that they have all accepted the Hegelian proposition that the state is the wellspring of American sovereignty.
At first this may seem a strange proposition, but I urge you to consider the matter more closely. All but two of the presidents since Kennedy have come out of the same two higher educational institutions. All have, in their own way, worked to consolidated federal power and to concentrate that power in the hands of the federal executive. It is easy to lose track of this in the face of the excesses of the Nixon administration’s attempt to establish an imperial presidency – and the current administration’s attempt to prefect that model. But the roots of the effort can be found in a quintessential Hegelian proscription within Kennedy’s inaugural address:
“Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country.”
Since that dark day it has been the overt objective of the American federal government to domesticate the citizenry – to turn the most revolutionary society ever to occupy a place on this earth into a passive and manageable one – to undo the entire vision of the founding fathers as codified in documents such as the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and to substitute for it the very vision that it was designed to replace. And why is this effort so important to them? And why are they so comfortable leaving the trappings of Democracy in place along the way? Because democracy is no threat to them but the Lockean vision of liberty is. Benjamin Franklin said it best:
“Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!”
The Wolves – professional politicians, lobbyists, special interests, trans-global corporations – are hungry and eager to dine. But, before they can, they must disarm the lamb – shear away the rights that have protected it – lull it into a false sense of security with bread and circuses – and then feast on the only impediment to their absolute dominance of global affairs.
Liberty is the right of the minority to ‘contest the vote’ and be heard in the process. Where the Hegelians stifle criticism – take a protest sign away from an American citizen and give her a trespassing ticket to boot – require citizens who want to attend a political event to sign a ‘loyalty oath’ before they will be admitted – a loyalty oath not to the country or the Constitution but to the candidate – the Lockeans celebrate that criticism and celebrate the protester as a patriot.
Americans have lost their liberty – or more properly they have given it away through their indifference, inattention and involvement in an ever more strident struggle of wealth and fame. They have handed the most valuable right that the founders gave us to a nest of politicians in exchange for a party card or for the right to be left alone by their government. By this single act they have participated in the most monstrous of creations – the current American government. America now has a government which is totally out of control – beyond the control of the American citizenry – a government free to be used as an powerful instrument to pursue the private agendas of the men and women who have gained control over it – in other words, a rogue state – a banana republic.
If the citizens see the coming election much as they have seen the last half dozen or so – as a choice between a republican or a democrat – then the process of dismantling the visions of the American Founding Fathers will continue – indeed will accelerate. But if they decide to insist on the return of their liberties – liberties which are unique in the entire world – then something most marvelous may occur. It is time to reclaim our liberty – to reverse the relationship with our government – to make it of, by and for the people – all the people rather than just the wealthy and privileged.
The presidential election of 2008 is monumentally important. If the Hegelians prevail, November 4th 2008 may be seen in history as the beginning of the end of an experiment which began on the 4th of July 1776. It will be the day which saw American citizens irretrievably converted into subjects of their government with only the faint trappings of James Madison’s republic remaining to remind them of what once was the glory of America. If, on the other hand, we reclaim our liberty and once again bend the government to the combined will of the citizenry, the turn will be made and the journey back to the very foundations of that republic will be underway.
And how is this to be done? By each of us realizing that we are Americans first and republicans, democrats or independents a distant second. American exceptionalism is based solidly on precisely that ideal – that Americans – no matter where their ancestors came from – no matter what the color of their skin – no matter what their religion or lack thereof – no matter what their party affiliation or ideology or lot in life – are brothers and sisters in a common cause – to perfect the vision of the founding fathers and to live that vision.
The price of liberty is a constant insistence that liberty is our right and cannot be taken away as long as the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are the founding documents of America. The price of liberty is a willingness to mount a revolution when government attempts to take that liberty away. The price of liberty is to constantly and effectively assure that such a government is subject to the sovereign right of Americans. The price of liberty is to be an American as it once meant to be one and should always mean to be one.
~~~~~~~~~~
Dr. Smith is a political and social theorist
who lives in Georgetown, Washington, DC
Entries (RSS)