I’ve already noted in Part First that the demon seed of Royalism burns in all governments, going back to the pharaohs. To control others.
That’s the natural (law) inclination of all governments. Knowing this simple, easy, common sense truth is important; for from the outset, the Founders built into our federal system a protective wall against this by putting the people solely in charge of limiting the power of government in matters of raising money; i.e. taking their money for special purposes that they might not approve.
After all, it is the people’s money, and unlike the kings of the world in 1776, our new government wouldn’t have any rents and royalties of its own that had been rolling into their treasuries for 500-1000 years. George III belonged to a monarchy system that had been raking in the dough in England since 1066,so making ends meet was less a concern.
What our Founders didn’t predict in 1776 was the growing involvement of the “academy” in the philosophical parameters and justifications of governance, more specifically Marxism and Fascism, inasmuch as both have gone a long way toward redefining government after our Revolution of 1776. It would require lots of insight in these philosophical ramblings, (I’ve just finished a study from our side that still made my eyes bleed) to determine whether there was a cause-and-effect between America’s arrival on the world stage as a threatening new form of government, and the rise of the philosophical underpinnings of Marxism and Fascism in late 18th and early 19th Century Europe, and later, post-modernism.
As just mentioned, it will put you to sleep to even try to read summaries of those various philosophies, especially on Wikipedia, where, as I noted in June, “My general rule of thumb is that if Wiki’s Reference and Bibliography citations are from 1990 or afterward, which about 80% of their references are, they probably have a postmodern leftwing political agenda and are also probably not factually reliably.” That was my rule about History. It is doubly true about philosophy. You will almost never find any consideration of the “Inalienable Rights of Man” in modern philosophical discussions, as if the People are mere knots on a log. The central view of postmodern philosophy and government is that everything is “alienable”, a world view that has defined world politics since the 19th Century, has slowly grafted itself into American political thinking today, including the Republican Party.
Still, the American Constitution was written for the use of ordinary, everyday people. Look it up! It was not written as a guide book for our betters to better manage us, as even many “conservatives” now believe. If you’ll read even short bios of philosophers, going back to Plato and Aristotle, even 1st Century Christian writers such as Irenaeus, you’ll note they’re not explaining their arguments to John and Martha Appleseed down on the farm, who, ostensibly, I might add, Christ was specifically reaching out to in His ministry. Jesus purposefully wasn’t preaching to either 1st Century philosophers or government or church bosses. Nor was Thomas Paine when he wrote Common Sense or Thomas Jefferson when he drafted the preamble to the Declaration of Independence, which, you already know, was spurred on by Paine’s little 47-page pamphlet, which apparently just about every hayseed in the Colonies had read. And underlined.
This was how America was designed to work.
This same bottom-up approach to government was also found in the Federalist Papers, a decade later.
This is why our legal system today is built on final arguments of fact being made to a jury of citizens, men and women, in both criminal and civil law.
Today, average Americans are having to take a crash courses in government with both a little “g” and a big “G” because, for the past 50 years no one ‘splained it to them in a commonsense way. (Still, I think there are a few good people who could put together a how-to book matching Paine’s that not only would diagram and explain modern government, but one they’d underline and keep within arms reach, much like Mom did her Bible.)
A real book, not a bookmark on the computer, for as sure as YouTube or “watchers” noted the clicks, it would be shutdown.
Today’s sermon is about “Distinguishing between Communism and Fascism” and why it’s important in today’s political landscape. Also that both are forms of Socialism.
- Younger college-educated Americans tend to favor Marxism or Communism. This is easy to understand why…its core philosophies are about things—economics and labor (workers)—concepts about which they know nothing about, so can easily be made to appear as objects of pity to young minds; victims of mean, powerful wealthy men. Since they had never actually worked for all that stuff they owned, and had never really connected that very important third dot that all regular people have to connect in order to survive…Work = Money = Stuff, they had no problem with the Marxist theory against private property at that time in their lives. In terms of critical thinking, that is even more true today.
- Older college-educated people naturally favor Fascism, as it is an alliance between Government and Business, which meant that people didn’t have to dress down in seedy uniforms or Mao jackets. Only they can never call it “fascism”, because of the German variety, which was built on a xenophobic love of country which no “apostolic” socialist today would ever consider. They can still hate Jews, only quietly, but they just can’t love the Fatherland. The genteel 3-piece suit of European socialism after World War II was a far better-tailored version of socialism. So, this was largely a generational difference, as when one passes 30 he/she begins to think of owning nicer things which comports with their elevated station in life; cars, clothes, even drugs. “Fascism”, because of that ugly link to the Germans had to be replaced, which explains so much of the post-modern philosophies, by snippy French and German philosophers, which I’ll have to write about some day—just not today.
- For the other 80% of society who are not “party-members”, Communism stands for the proposition that the State owns all the property, while Fascism stands for a government model in which there is a marriage between the State (government) and Big Business, who then brings in the big bucks then allows the State to parcel it out, keeping a portion in accordance with a standard of living that is always measured well above the 80%. In both cases they tell themselves they are doing this on behalf of those unfortunate, backward 80%. But in the “fascist” system, the Government allows them to make great wealth, and keep enough to keep up appearances and feel superior, while taking the rest to spend as it best sees fit. On the receiving end, the people see not one iota of difference, (China is going through this phase right now.)
- When seen from the ground floor, Communism was always a child’s fable, while Fascism is where they go to build their nests eggs, a soft cushy position in the system. And in America, the wealth-production capital of all history, that can be a lot,..especially if mom or dad left them a trust. So while every socialist in his/her 40’s-50s know this system will eventually collapse, they are betting their best cards that they will be safely snuggled away in some tropical haven, sipping Mai-tai’s on the beach, when it does collapse, and that it is much better than taking a golden parachute with Disney and buying a Hallmark franchise in a mall in Indianapolis.
This is what we are witnessing today, an attempt to bring a “fascist” regime to the United States, which, you already know, is just another form of Royalism. My simple point here is that while it begins as a “limited dictatorship” between State and private sector, the more power that accrues to the Government in overseeing the economic side, ensures its ultimate failure, for the Government is no longer answerable to anyone. Like the Pope, Big Business has no armies. Neither do the People.
Since Government is the biggest member of the Dow Jones Index, only is not listed, or reportable to anyone, nor can be bought or sold on the open market, (but is always open for business in the dark), this must be reminded to citizens who still are, constitutionally, it only shareholders, that time is running out when they (we) will be able to do anything about it.
In short the Government has become the self-appointed principle shareholder in the American economy, only has now devised a voting plan that will not allow its own Constitutional shareholders to have a say in how it is managed.
With the speeding attrition of the generations that made free elections possible over 200 years, and the rise of a clueless generation to replace them, and the rising chances that a fair election may no longer be possible, we now are walking on sifting sands.
One way or the other, that has to be changed.