August 14, 2003
The Line
Ask Americans what their politics are and they’ll usually state their relationship to the left, center or right. But what does left or right mean? Where is the center? Where do you fit in? Are you sure?
Before the United States came along countries were almost always run by one man rule. The ruler would generally have a group of powerful men under him. Kings and Knights , Tribal Chiefs and Councilmen, Emperors and Congress, whatever you call them. Let’s call them kings. In this arrangement the King was all powerful. He was usually appointed by God. God usually appointed the guy with the biggest army.
The advantage of being King was that a king could do just about anything he wanted. Not completely anything. Sometimes he had to keep his wife, political interests or the holy men happy. But he could do mostly anything. For instance, if he woke up one morning and decided your head needed chopping off, your head would get chopped off. It didn’t matter if you had done anything wrong. In fact lots of people who had done nothing wrong got their head chopped off. Of course the King couldn’t have people thinking he was having your head chopped for little or no reason, so charges would be invented and proven. But basically, your head was going to get chopped off. Because the king said so.
In this system if the King is a good guy, great! But if the King is bad or incompetent, uh-oh. In this system if the King likes you, great! If he doesn’t, uh-oh. In this system you, or your actions, don’t matter. There was only one rule. It was whatever rule the king decided to issue.
When the American revolutionaries broke away from British rule they thought “why don’t we govern ourselves through elected representatives and have rules that everyone has to abide by”. That way they wouldn’t have to worry about getting a bad king. No matter how bad the elected representatives were they would still have to treat each citizen according to the law whether they liked him or not. And, in case bad representatives still tried to abuse individuals, juries were given the authority to dismiss bogus charges.
This was a pretty radical idea. Very liberal for it’s day. Men having individual rights. Participating in free markets. This is the first generation of liberalism. When you hear the term “classical liberal” this is usually what is being referred to. Let’s put them on a line representing political extremes.
What’s on the extreme right? Something called anarchy. Anarchists don’t believe in any government at all. Anarchists are few in number and probably wouldn’t come close to where most people live. I’ve never even met one. So the line becomes:
On the extreme left are people with what’s called a “collectivist” mentality. Collectivists can be recognized by their frequent use of words like “we” and “us”. They tend to see people as part of a larger order. And that people have a duty to a higher order. They view mankind as an actual thing, and treat it as a physical object. They believe that as long as the group is better off then individuals must be better off. Their ideas are implemented in a form of government called “socialism” .
In this political system all aspects of the individual’s life are subject to “the will of the people” which is determined by government leaders and expressed mostly through beating, killing and imprisoning individuals who disagree with “the will of the people”.
Under socialism all people are considered equal. Government officials though, because they have a lot of responsibility deciding who should be beaten, killed or imprisoned are a lot more equal than others. So they have the big houses, cars, mistresses, etc. “The people” are equal in a more non monetary sense.
So, we have:
Let’s go back to the classic liberal. When our country was formed the rules were contained in the Constitution. As time went on some people thought it would be a good idea to change some rules. Others liked things just fine the way they were. The “changers” who’s changes often included giving the federal government more duties were known as liberals and the people who liked things the way the were, conservatives.
Our nation was founded on individual rights and free markets. And it should be pointed out that no matter how much change liberals advocated, even into the early twentieth century, they would still embrace these as twin pillars of American strength.
But this began to change.
In the 1920’s as the disease of socialism took root and grew in other parts of the world America was not immune. In our country the communist party never won a presidential election. Never came close. As far as I know they never even put anyone in congress. But their vote totals increased to the point politicians were convinced Americans wanted more socialism. No one was more willing to give it to them than FDR but he wasn’t the only one. These are the most grievous offenses that come to my mind.
· Income Tax - 1913
· Social Security - 1935
· Minimum Wage - 1938
· Medicare - 1965
· Federal Education - 1965
All of these were unconstitutional yet liberals managed to get legislation pushed through. And conservatives or “Republicans”, wanting to appease “the middle” followed leftward.
For a long time Republicans” detested this and most, to the extent that they moved leftward, were dragged kicking and screaming. They didn’t like government expanding beyond it’s Constitutional limits and still said “the Constitution means what it says”. The Democrats came out with several new “living, breathing” interpretations and said it didn’t. This kept happening and by the 1970’s things would look something like this.
In 1971 the Libertarian Party was formed to advocate individual rights and free markets. Sound familiar? These beliefs were the same as the ones held by Classical Liberals and later, Conservatives. Libertarians stepped into the void when other parties abandoned core values and moved leftward. Libertarians advocate a small, limited federal government as defined in the Constitution. Our belief’s , being anchored to the Constitution don’t drift to the left or right. We don’t wear wigs like Washington and Jefferson but we believe pretty much what they believed.
Let’s talk about the difference between your typical Democrat or Republican party member and party leadership. Democrats and Republicans are traveling on the road to the left. There must be someone leading them to the left. By definition, those would be called leaders. So there is a difference between the national parties and the average party member.
I think the gulf is fairly wide. I believe most democrat or republican voters would be shocked if they knew how far to the left their candidates are.
Ross Perot split from the Republican party and ran for president in 1992. He launched the Reform Party in 1995. So they’re more to the right than the left. They have good ideas, like balancing the budget, reforming the tax system and cleaning up corruption. But as a libertarian I would say their solutions are more of a band aid than fundamental change. Like the Republicans they don’t want so much to reduce big government but rather use it for better reasons. If I had to peg them I’d put them right about even with Joe Republican, more nationalistic but the same basic politics.
This is as good a place as any to talk about what’s called “a cult of personality”. That’s when people follow after a man instead of a set of ideas. Perot was very charismatic and people flocked to support him. But after he left, there wasn’t anyone comparable to rally around. The party seemed to have some difficulty deciding exactly what reform was needed and factions developed. Lawsuits ensued. They got another famous man, Pat Buchanan, to run for president this last time but I think we’re seeing this party fade from the scene without their creator.
Ralph Nader, another cult of personality, formed the Green party and ran for president in 2000. The Green party is supposed to be environmentally oriented. But I suggest the cleanliness of the planet is not their primary concern. There are plenty of people who care greatly about the environment. The left does not have a monopoly on them. Make no mistake. The Greens are mostly socialists dressed in environmental clothing. I wouldn’t touch them with a ten foot environmentally friendly pole. They go way over on the left.
At this point one thing ought to be obvious. As the liberals move left and the conservative move left then the middle, by definition, moves left. If you consider yourself to be “middle of the road” you are part of a group sliding historically leftward. Whether that’s good or bad you’re going to have to judge for yourself. But there is no question the middle moves left.
One might make a good argument this dot or that should be rightfully shifted in one direction or the other. I won’t quibble much. But I think on a rough scale I have them in the right place. And in the right order although someone could make a good argument I have Joe Democrat’s dot a little too far to the left. I could be convinced Joe Democrat is actually to the right of the Republican leadership.
Summation
So which is best, left or right?
People have opinions on all manner of things. Which is better, Pepsi or Coke? Chocolate or vanilla? The mountains or the seashore? Most things boil down to personal taste. I think most people assume political opinions are the same way. They tend to think nobody’s really right or wrong. Or that it doesn’t matter, left or right will probably yield about the same results.
Most people identify themselves as somewhere in the middle. Some because it makes sense to them to mix a couple of measures of socialism and a couple of capitalism. Others, because adopting an extreme position would make them an extremist. And few have the courage to be known as an extremist because those are often otherwise known as nut cases. I see that as the equivalent of mixing gas and water in your car’s fuel tank because you don’t want to commit to one set of ideas over another.
Be not deceived. Different political systems yield different results.
Socialism has achieved the following
· murdered, tortured and imprisoned more of their own citizens than any other political system including the Nazis
· run economies into the ground to the extent basic supplies such as milk, bread, flour and sugar are routinely unavailable on grocery store shelves
Capitalism has achieved
· lowest rates of government sponsored murder and relatively little torture.
· the greatest prosperity for the greatest number of people (In 45 years I’ve never been to a store that didn’t have milk, bread, etc)
Countries that respect individual rights and promote free markets tend to be the most prosperous. These are the countries people are trying to immigrate to. Countries that violate their citizen’s rights and use socialist economies tend to be poor. These are the countries people are literally dying to get out of.
Freedom and prosperity. Oppression and poverty.
You pick.