Moral Government, Not Just for the 19th Century
by Nelson Hultberg
February 7, 2006
A most profound philosophical truth has been thrown down the Orwellian
memory hole over the past 100 years. We no longer teach our children
that the classical liberal heritage of the Founders was noble and
good. Yet it was this intellectual heritage of laissez-faire,
in which all men were held to be self-responsible beings possessed
of equal rights, that formed the cornerstones of America. This is
what gave to our country its grand idealism. This is what created
the mindset for early Americans to build their new nation into Earth's
Eldorado.
Throughout those sprawling colonial years to the trying times of
the Revolution, and beyond to the boom towns of the West, the railroad
age, Edison, Carnegie, and Henry Ford, a new way of life (never before
experienced in history) took shape. The dominant figures that built
America were neither privileged lords, nor leveling bureaucrats.
They were dynamic entrepreneurs, patriots, pioneers, scientists,
inventors -- bold, ingenious men and women willing to rise or fall
on their own merits and the strength of their faith in a just Providence.
They fought a war with a ragged little army against a mighty empire,
and won. They wrote a Constitution for all the ages, and crossed
a vast and death dealing frontier with nothing but covered wagons
and their own personal stamina. New inventions and miracles of production
and an astonishing wealth, that staid men of Europe never dreamed
possible, sprang from the fervor of their unbounded ambition. They
turned useless prairies into golden wheat fields, their wagons into
powerful locomotives, and a savage wilderness into a network of commerce
and trade. Their tiny republic grew to be a colossus in face of a
scornful Europe still mired in the Old World that couldn't conceive
of why men were meant for liberty. Law was crowned as King, and all
men were held to be equal before it. Government conveyed privilege
vanished, and men pursued a life centered upon the individual for
the first time in recorded history.
The Philosophy of Individualism
It was thus that a whole new philosophy came to be through the first
stirrings of these brave men and women. It was the philosophy of individualism,
and it stood in direct contrast to the accepted beliefs of Europe,
which taught men to seek security and subordinate themselves always
to the dictates of the monarch, or the feudal lords, or whoever had
the power of the state behind them. This new American philosophy
declared that men were their own rulers, that they were endowed by
their Creator with free will, that they were responsible for their
own lives and possessed the power within them to overcome any obstacle.
It was a philosophy that exploded across a whole continent with the
most dazzling burst of hope and optimism mankind had ever seen. It
transformed the world and turned life into an evolving, mobile force
for good instead of the stagnant, autocratic ritual it had been for
so much of human history.
For 125 years, Americans rigorously adhered to this remarkable idea
of individualism, and as a result, their prosperity grew to unparalleled
heights. Life was meaningful. Peace was the rule, men of good will
abounded; and most important of all, the free creativity of sovereign
beings was everywhere.
With the advent of the 20th century, however, the alien doctrines
of Marxist thought began to invade our land under the subtle guise
of "social progressivism." The grand principles of the Founding Fathers
that gave birth to our nation were redefined in academia as the "elitist
schemes of aristocratic reactionaries." Clever sophists and blind
ideologues merged to strip the truths of 1776 of their moral-philosophical
base. Men and women were communalized into chess pieces to be maneuvered
by social engineers. Government bureaucracies -- the scourge of rebel
colonists 150 years prior -- were suddenly idealized into modern
saviors to solve the great dilemmas of humankind. Billions of dollars
of personal wealth were confiscated from the entrepreneurial class
to feed burgeoning bureaucratic appetites.
As a result, our federal government now controls and manipulates
our businesses, our schools, our banks, our unions, our welfare,
our health care, and our retirement. Life has become less and less
meaningful, peace has become the exception, men of good will have
shrunk from sight, and that ever so vital sovereignty of being has
faded in face of the spreading ministrations of the Welfare State.
"The individual means less and less, mass and collectivity more
and more -- and so the net of servitude which hems in personal development
becomes ever denser, more closely meshed, and inescapable," wrote
Wilhelm Ropke 45 years ago in his great classic, A Humane Economy.
[1]
He saw all too clearly the horrible changes that were sweeping over
the Western world as a result of collectivism and bureaucratism.
Can Freedom Survive?
The fundamental question we face now is: Can the philosophy of individualism,
inaugurated by Jefferson, Smith and Locke, survive? Or is it to wither
away under the ever swelling shadow of a monster government and the
womb to tomb security its social engineers are forcing upon us? Are
we as a people to just passively accept being humble wards of the
state and underlings to Washington's feudal lords who direct its
encroachments, or do we still possess enough of that spirit that
founded America to overthrow such trespassings upon the basic rights
of man? Do we, as human beings, still value freedom; or is it
really state omnipresence that we seek down deep in some craven corner
of our souls?
Can we, as Americans, learn from the irrefutable lessons of Rome
and other nations of history who succumbed to the arrogance of centralized
statism and arbitrary law? Or does history have to repeat itself
a few more times before we realize that reality cannot be cheated,
that its laws must be obeyed in order for life to be good; that bread
does not come from stones, nor wealth from paper dollars; that government's
power is either limited or it is tyranny; and that
a nation of spendthrifts is doomed to destruction.
Can we not see that the troubles we suffer from today are rooted
in our abandonment of the individualist creed that originally built
this nation? Are our memories so short, our craving for the unearned
so strong, our obsession with security so great that we no longer
wish to face life on the strengths of our own merits?
When the Founding Fathers of America gathered in Philadelphia in
1787 to establish their new country, they were seeking a thorough
reduction of the coercive powers of the state not just for the 19th
century, but for all of time. They knew that cultural conditions
may change, that progress may rework the world, but that the basic
relationship of man and his government was never to change. They
knew there was but one kind of government that was right for human
civilization -- a strictly limited government.
The Constitutional Republic they formed was not based upon glib
expediency and the lure of welfare entitlements, but upon certain
self-evident principles that are eternal. The Founders understood
these self-evident truths very well:
-
If justice is to prevail, then people must be left alone to
peacefully live according to the dictates of their own dreams.
-
If men are to remain independent, then they must rise or fall
according to their own capabilities.
-
If freedom is to be our goal, then all men must possess the
right to free will, free association, and free trade.
-
And most important of all, if men are to be equal, then they
must all possess equal fundamental rights. This was the meaning
of America: equality of rights under the law, not equality of
results in the achievements of life.
Yet as significant as these great truths are, they are seldom discussed
today in our chic and learned establishment circles. They are being
evaded by all those in positions of political power, and until they
are again debated openly and honestly, the malevolent growth of government
bureaucracy will not be stopped.
Our leaders must begin to confront the real problem in America --
that of the government's unlawful erosion of our basic rights. The
issue is not how much should Washington tax the people for welfare,
social security, and economic stimulus packages -- but does the state
have the right at all to tax any man against his will for such grandiose
national goals? The necessity is not to control rising prices, but
to stop the government from inflating the money supply, which is
the cause of rising prices. The need is not to keep modern day Machiavellians
out of politics, but to keep politics out of free enterprise.
Above all else, the main dilemma confronting America is this: Are
men to be allowed to build their lives on their own according to objective
law, or is the state going to plan their lives for them according
to arbitrary dictates? Until this question is faced, all discussion
about freedom and justice is a sham.
Is Collectivism Dead?
With the dramatic collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 and the fading
of Communist Party control over Eastern Europe, the ideology of socialism
was administered, in many Western eyes, a final death blow. But look
closer, for the coffin is not being nailed shut. Like some grotesque
alien from outer space that assumes human shape, the monster inside
is merely reforming its basic goals into a more salable ideological
framework.
Incredibly the purveyors of forced collectivity on the political
left in Europe and America still cling to their gargoyle dream --
the grand merger of Eastern socialism and Western capitalism into
an authoritarian World Welfare State where equality of conditions for
everyone is implemented. Still they proclaim that mankind must continue
on to build the collectivist ideal; it just has to be along more "democratic
lines." Still they proclaim that free markets and coercive bureaucracies
must merge, that with more time, more taxation, and more regulation,
humanity will one day realize the collectivist paradise.
What is needed in place of Marxist socialism, they inform us, is
the more moderate democratic socialism of Sweden. But to consider
individualist capitalism is impossible. Men must be taught to relinquish
the direction of their lives to professional bureaucrats and academic
elites who are so much more "qualified" to determine how we are to
live. When all this has come to pass, mankind will surely have found
the egalitarian kingdom.
Of course, the collectivists who dominate our schools and media
today do not incorporate such clear-cut language as to their intentions.
Collectivists use a form of Orwellian newspeak that makes their despotic
goals appear to be a "new kind of freedom." They always paint their
tyranny in the hues of "community and security." They always talk
about "the people versus the powerful" and what government will give
to you if only you support it with steadily more of your earnings.
But we are never to dwell on the fact that the most powerful danger
to human lives throughout history has always been government. We
are never to dwell on the fact that the price paid for government
guaranteed security is government imposed slavery.
Thus, even in face of collectivism's worldwide squalor and despair,
most pundits of the West still believe the socialist ideological
corpse retains some semblance of idealism, needing only "theoretical
adjustments" in order to be workable. Such is the miasma of our age
that has conned the entirety of the world's people into kneeling
at the altar of Big Brother and renouncing large chunks of the self-reliance
they once possessed.
The Rise of "Creative Government"
The erudite scholars and editorialists who dominate today's university
and media scene and so glibly report that we must re-evaluate and
modify the antiquated principles of individualism, that we must strive
to make our government "more creative" in the solving of modern day
problems, are so consumed with myopic scientism that they can no
longer comprehend the living of life in heroic form.
When you start "re-evaluating individualism," you are questioning
the moral legitimacy of freedom itself and the natural right of all
men to personally direct the advancement of their own lives. It is
like asking if we, as living creatures, really need sunlight's photosynthetic
process or the biophysical powers of air and water. It is tampering
with the most elemental of life's requisites. To say we must "legislatively
modify individualism" is to say we must forcefully modify
humans, which is to make men into mechanized cogs. To propose that
we develop a "more creative government" is to propose the unleashing
of those dark forces of man's nature that lurk beneath the chains
of our Constitution. Such semantic snake oil games are the province
of history's cerebral charlatans sneaking out once again from under
the rocks of prudence and principle to desecrate the pursuit of high
level life.
The only kind of intellect that could allow such concepts as "creative
government" and the "modification of individualism" to find favor
in his brain is the man who does not see other men as actual entities
that think, or strive, or desire with that fervency of hope that
is God given. He does not consider other men as real live people with
definable rights, but as anonymous lumps of matter to be schooled,
worked, fed, clothed and manipulated in some sociological chess game
hatched and implemented from Washington to further advance the Great
Centralized Planned Society.
This is why America is careening down the path to political absolutism.
The perpetuation of the Great Centralized Planned Society has transcended
the rights of individual men. Blind, arrogant intellectuals dominating
our schools, our churches, our media, and our government -- captive
of a false economics and consumed by visions of material bliss without
toil -- are attempting to "modify" the gallant philosophy that built
this country with a hideous, smothering collectivism. The
goal of these intellectuals is not to establish freedom and independence
as their clever newspeak declares, but to bring about a mass, standardized,
state-dictated security in which centralized government runs every
important aspect of our lives while consuming two-thirds of our earnings.
And too many Americans are tolerating such a goal placidly, almost
enjoyably.
The worshipers of "creative government" that rule America today
(in the legislatures, in the media, and in the universities) are
lost forever to the siren call of the mega-state and the dehumanizing
bureaucracies it generates -- unable to conceive of life in any other
way and unwilling to make the necessary reversal of thought that
preservation of freedom now demands. They don't even realize what "freedom" is
and why it is so important, both psychologically and economically,
for men to be allowed to make their own choices in the furtherance
of their lives.
Such blind apparatchiks for Big Government march imperviously on,
still praising the all-pervasive statism of the New Deal, only crafting
their message around "better" government programs instead of "more" government
programs. Still they steadfastly profess that Washington must expand
the Great Centralized Planned Society, that Congress must control
all the facets of our lives and whatever else is desired by the new
god Demos (about which Tocqueville so presciently warned us).
They can't possibly abandon their governmental obsessions even in
face of the "new despotism" they are bringing down upon us, for they
would then have to admit they've lived their lives on a huge paradigmatic
fallacy -- and few men have the courage to do that.
The Fierce Battle Ahead
But for all those men and women who still value the resplendent
legacy that our Founders bestowed upon us, there is a great battle
lying ahead. It is a fight that will be rife with danger and devastating
setbacks. Powerful political and financial forces are allied against
the restoration of freedom to America. If liberty's days appear dark
right now, however, and the fight seems hopeless, remember that all
things of great value require a fierce and protracted struggle, that
most often right when events are at their worst is the time to press
on the hardest.
Is this not our heritage as a country and a people? To persevere
at all costs? Our forefathers came to these shores in rickety ships
with nothing but heaps of hopeful dreams. They weathered the freezing
snows of Valley Forge and fought for eight long years to form their
Republic. They built the quality of their lives and their communities
to unheard of levels under constant threat of extinction from perilous
dangers all around them. And now in our present crisis, the least
we can do is live up to the treasured heritage they have passed on
to us.
Let it not be said that it is the nature of an American to accept
a life of servitude. Let it rather be said that there is too much
fire deep in his soul, that what this country was meant to be can
still be won, that the future belongs to those who are willing to
stand on their own and walk through this world's enigma as independent
people.
Surely there lies more mettle in the American psyche than that which
our present day demonstrates. We cannot truly wish to hold as our
ideal this ghastly egalitarianism that drives men to political subservience
and a desecration of all that is sublime? Are we expected to take
pride in the bleak servility of a demeaning state welfarism and shameful
collaboration with collectivist authoritarians that are propelling
humanity toward Huxley's Brave New World? Is this the final denouement
of the once noble American experiment? Or do we still possess enough
inner fiber to face the great moral crisis of our age and set about
restoring this nation upon the sustenance of our forefathers -- faith
in Providence, right reason, and the willingness to fight for a society
in which liberty truly prevails?
In 1944, Nobel Laureate Friedrich Hayek wrote: "Though we neither
can wish nor possess the power to go back to the reality of the nineteenth
century, we have the opportunity to realize its ideals -- and they
were not mean. We have little right to feel in this respect superior
to our grandfathers; and we should never forget that it is we, the
twentieth century, and not they, who have made a mess of things.
If they had not yet fully learned what was necessary to create the
world they wanted, the experience we have since gained ought to have
equipped us better for the task. If in the first attempt to create
a world of free men we have failed, we must try again. The guiding
principle that a policy of freedom for the individual is the only
truly progressive policy remains as true today as it was in the nineteenth
century." [2]
In all of history, there has been only one society that has come
close to a morally proper form of government whereby men are their
own rulers. And that society was the first 125 years of America from
1789 to 1914. Let us restore and perfect that ideal; and with it,
develop once again the nobility, the wisdom and the personal greatness
that sustained it.
The fate of all mankind lies with what we as Americans make of our
country. If we continue down the path to collectivism, then so also
will the world, for if America herself loses faith in a free society,
how possibly could the rest of humanity keep such a faith? Under
the pressure of collectivism's insidious lure, the lights of freedom
would gradually be extinguished everywhere, and another Dark Age
would descend upon the spirit that was ours. But if we regain the
strength to once again want to live in freedom, so also will the
rest of the world, and slowly step by step, we could restore the
grandeur and boundless optimism that once were the hallmarks of the
West. Life would again be heroic, and men could stand tall in the
knowledge that they are fulfilling their proper destiny.
Life is meant for so much more than the base idolatries that the
modern state worshipers teach. We will never find solace in our obsessions
with the womb of state welfarism and its confiscated security. We
will find it only in pursuit of the wellspring of truth that transcends
both the insular self and egalitarian lust, a truth that can only
be realized by respecting the legacy of our Founders. That legacy
was meant not just for the 19th century. It was meant for all of
time.
Notes:
1. Wilhelm Ropke, A Humane Economy (Chicago: Henry Regnery,
1960), p. 17.
2. Friedrich A. Hayek, The Road to Serfdom (Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1944), p.240. Emphasis added.
Copyright © 2006 Americans for a Free Republic
This article is published here by permission of the author.
Origunally published HERE

Nelson Hultberg is a freelance writer in Dallas, Texas and a graduate of Beloit College in Wisconsin with a degree in Economics. He serves as the Executive Director of Americans for a Free Republic. His articles have appeared in publications such as The Dallas Morning News, Insight, The Freeman, Liberty, The Social Critic, and on numerous websites such as FreeMarketNews, FinancialSense, SafeHaven and Gold-Eagle. He is the author of Why We Must Abolish The Income Tax And The IRS and Breaking the Demopublican Monopoly. In addition he has just finished a book on political-economic philosophy titled, The Golden Mean: The Case for Libertarian Politics and Conservative Values.