Category Archives: Government & Politics

Illusions: Desperate Students

Peace in the Holy Land and a Balanced Budget,

This essay appeared in a substantially abridged form in The American Thinker.
It will appear shortly in The Land of the Free in the form here.

Too frequently, in my role as a University Professor, I encounter the following situation. Three quarters of the way through a semester, a student in a class that I am teaching shows up at my office. The student has done almost no work in the class and is failing badly. Yet the prospect of a failing grade in the course is so repellent to the student (e.g., because it will cause the loss of scholarship money, or expulsion from a degree program, or even just because Dad will be furious) that he (or she) absolutely cannot accept it as a possible outcome. The student fantasizes that it cannot and will not occur. However, he recognizes that perhaps some special effort must be made to ensure that, however slim the chance (in his mind), it does not happen. So he assures me that he really knows the material, that he will study hard, that he will submit the assignments that he has failed to complete and that he will get an excellent grade on the final exam. As he tells me this, I know that there is absolutely no chance that any of it will come to pass. But as he says it, he believes it. It is really very sad. I know, with 99.9% certainty, that I will be entering a failing grade for him at the end of the semester. He knows with equal certainty that I will not. He deludes himself because reality is too painful to confront and so he continues on in his deluded state until reality smacks him in the face.

Something similar is going on in the minds of effete, leftist, foreign policy “experts.” They claim that they want to see peace in the Holy Land. They acknowledge that the land to which the phrase applies is the home of two distinct and belligerent people who have not been able to agree on a formula for sharing the land. They also believe that the warring factions both have legitimate claims to residence in the disputed territory. Furthermore, they are convinced that an agreement to share the land can be achieved – just as soon as both parties to the conflict (albeit, especially the Israelis) finally recognize the futility of trying to exclude the other from his patrimony. And finally, they are certain that the agreement can be brought into existence by the right combination of outside pressure and internal reconciliation, and the correct mix of these ingredients will be concocted in the relatively near future.

These experts are absolutely and unmistakably WRONG! There is no peaceful reconciliation around the corner. There is no correlation of forces, spirit of cooperation or clever formula that will yield a settlement. The Arab/Muslim world is unalterably opposed to the existence of a sovereign Jewish State – indeed of any non-Muslim entity – in the heart of the Umma. Nothing is going to change that. The best that can happen is that Israel will be able to fend off the onslaught – through hot wars punctuated by cold interregnums – for the next 50-100 years. There is no need to outline the worst that can happen. Nevertheless, “objective” (actually, left-leaning) diplomats, statesmen and media-types are convinced – despite all evidence to the contrary – that a peace formula, which will defuse the stalemate, is right around the corner, soon to be uncovered.

In fact, they all pay lip service to the formula that has already been discovered: two states for two peoples. The mantra is repeated endlessly and accepted unquestioningly when they address the problem. It is absurd. The Palestinians in particular and the Arab/Muslim world in general have no interest in implementing the formula. First, they have no great desire to create yet another (23rd) Arab state – one that is rent with internecine hostility (Fatah vs. Hamas) before it is even constituted. But even more important, the mantra is inconsistent with the overarching goal of the Muslim Middle East: to bring about the destruction of Israel – if not physically, then at least as a Jewish State. The latter goal is painfully evident to any with open eyes, but myopic leftist internationalists do not see it. They continue to formulate programs and policies to implement the mantra in the face of its manifest impossibility.

Here is a third instance of this kind of frustratingly contradictory situation – in which an individual or group believes in a forthcoming scenario that has no chance of occurring. This one, like the second above, amounts to self-deception on a massive scale. It is the United States’ budget – specifically, the deficit and debt. Too many, but especially naïve (and sometimes duplicitous) liberals believe, or profess to believe that the unconscionable deficits the USA has run for most of the last 80 years, and the ensuing unsustainable debt that has accumulated – together pose a grave, even an existential danger to the republic. These twin problems must be dealt with, and they will be dealt with when the country elects the right people to implement the right policies to achieve the goal of eliminating the deficit and paying down the debt.

But it is patent nonsense. The history of the last century and especially of the last dozen years teaches that virtually all of the American people (not just liberals) have neither the will nor the desire to practice federal fiscal responsibility. Moreover, we pretend it is not so. We behave as if it is just a matter of time until we install the right political configuration of leaders that will get control of our fiscal delinquency. But in fact, we are racing inexorably toward the day of reckoning wherein a financial/political/cultural crisis of epic proportions will bring about a cataclysmic fiscal, and likely social, collapse.

How can people be so blind? So misled? So oblivious to the obvious? How did we reach the current status in the two latter situations – i.e., dealing with the US deficit and debt, and peace between Israel and the Arabs? In both cases, as with our delusional student, reality is just too painful to contemplate. If the US does not get control of its financial affairs, then eventually some major fiscal disaster awaits us. The debt is projected to grow to $20 trillion, then $30 trillion, then… As in a household or as in a business, unsustainable debt for a nation MUST lead to financial ruin. Will the result be widespread poverty? Political repression? Social chaos? The loss of freedom? Whatever occurs, it is certain to spell the doom of the American experiment and is therefore too horrible to contemplate. So we continue on in our reverie that we will manage our deficits and debt – soon, just as soon as we get the right players and right formulas in place.

The Middle East scenario is similar. If we accept that the Arab/Muslim world is inexorably opposed to the existence of Israel and determined to kill it, then it is rational to believe that sooner or later the correlation of forces will realign to the point that Israel will no longer be able to defend itself. What then: mass slaughter? Total expulsion oft he Jews? A Jihadist orgy of unimaginable proportions? Once again, too horrible to contemplate and therefore not acceptable as a legitimate vision. Instead theworld prances around in the self-delusion that the dispute can and will be settled as soon as the right players and policies are in place. It is an illusion.

Who Will Compose a Manifesto for American Revival?

The progressive assault on American society is nearing total victory. The assault was in fact a revolution as it sought to overthrow the governing structures of the United States by undermining and abrogating the fundamental principles that gave birth to those structures. The assault, which began at the turn of the twentieth century, met with almost immediate success. In particular, the ratification of the 16th and 17th amendments to the Constitution and the establishment of the Federal Reserve bear testimony to that success. Although many pundits argue that it was not until the advent of Barack Obama that the progressive victory was assured, one can make a very strong case that the cataclysmic upheavals in American society that occurred in the 1960s guaranteed the ultimate success of the progressive revolution. There have been a few partially successful conservative counterattacks: Coolidge in the 1920s, Reagan in the 1980s, Gingrich in the 1990s and the Tea Party a few years ago. But all of these have a “Battle of the Bulge” character – delaying the inevitable, not preventing it.

I have argued on numerous occasions that the fundamental strategy of the progressive assault is encapsulated in the aphorism usually attributed to the early twentieth century Italian philosopher, Antonio Gramsci: capture the culture, the politics will follow. And that is exactly what the progressives did. Through an unremitting assault on the basic cultural institutions of American society, the progressive movement captured virtually all of the society’s opinion-forming organs. Today the media, universities, legal profession, seminaries, federal bureaucracy, journalism schools, educational system, etc. are overwhelmingly dominated by leftists, collectivists and statists. Not surprisingly, the politics have followed – to the extent that a radical statist with absolutely no experience in any qualifying aspect of American life (e.g., business, military, executive) has been elected – and re-elected – president of the US. Surely, when surveying the scene in 1895, the young progressive must have viewed the revolutionary task ahead of him as gargantuan – perhaps even impossible. But he and his cohort set to work and scarcely more than a century later, his progeny sits atop the mountain. With perseverance, single-minded dedication and adherence to the game plan, they overcame the enormous obstacles in their path and converted American society into the multicultural, government-dependent, environmentally-obsessed, racially divisive, militarily-weakened, redistributionist, self-denigrating, secular, morally decadent, class conscious society that we comprise today.

Thus in 2013, a young conservative, when contemplating a counterrevolution that would return America to its founding principles, faces a daunting landscape as inhospitable as his progressive forbearer confronted 118 years earlier. He will need the same perseverance, tenacity and dedication if he is to repeat the success. And he needs to follow the same game plan – that is, he needs to recapture the culture. In other venues, I have proposed some strategies to do so, but here I would like to suggest the need for a tool. All revolutions require a guidebook – a manifesto that outlines the fundamental rationale of the revolutionaries and points the way toward the game plan that will drive the revolution. Historical examples are manifold. Perhaps the most famous is the US Declaration of Independence. Others include: the Declaration of the Rights of Man (issued during the French Revolution), the Cartagena Manifesto of Simon Bolivar, the Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf. Two more recent examples are the Port Huron Statement and the Contract with America. The latter, which inspired Gingrich and to some extent the Tea Party, has had rather limited success. On the other hand, the former (usually attributed to Tom Hayden) has played a significant role in motivating and guiding progressive efforts over the last half century. One could argue that the manifesto for the conservative counterrevolution has already been written by Mark Levin. His 2009 book Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto is a serious candidate to fill the bill. But I fear that its longevity and influence may be limited. Time will tell. However, it is likely that something shorter and more focused, but equally eloquently and passionately argued, might be necessary. I don’t propose to write that document here. Rather I will describe what I see as the five fundamental components that the document must encompass and address if it is to galvanize and motivate the public and also to serve as the inspiration for the decades-long effort that it must guide. Those five are:

  1. Freedom. The primary thrust of a conservative manifesto must be freedom. The basic tenets of the Declaration of Independence must be re-emphasized. The most fundamental ideal of the American Revolution is that all human beings are born free, that each individual is inherently equal to any other before the law, that we all enjoy certain inalienable rights endowed by God, or Nature’s God – specifically, the rights spelled out in the Bill of Rights, and that governments are instituted almost exclusively to protect those rights. The present system, in which the Federal Government acts as the initiator and enforcer of “new rights” in a manner that is far beyond the scope of the powers enumerated to it in our Constitution, is contrary to the spirit of freedom and constitutes a grave danger to our individual liberty.
  2. Economic Opportunity. Building on and consistent with political freedom is our right to economic freedom. The people have the right to choose their mode and place of work, to enter into monetary or labor contracts freely, to enjoy the fruits of their labor and to buy and sell property as they see fit — all, of course, within the rule of law. The government’s sole role in the economic foundation of our lives is to enforce the rule of law – dispassionately, objectively and without prejudice. In addition, our economic system will embrace free market capitalism – because it is the only system consistent with economic and political freedom, and because it yields far greater overall prosperity than does socialism, Keynesianism or any other economic system.
  3. American Exceptionalism. We must re-endorse the following ideas: the American experiment in political and economic freedom makes us unique among the nations of the Earth; America should remain a shining example to the world of freedom and hope; America has been and continues to be a force for good in the world; we welcome immigrants to our shores who share our ideals; and we will maintain the strength and will to move the world towards a more humane, free and prosperous future.
  4. Morality. We must re-endorse the notion of our Founders that our system of government and rules for organizing society (i.e., as a democratic, Constitutional Republic) can work only if the people – who enjoy widespread liberty – are moral, decent and virtuous. We live in a time when one man’s morality is another man’s chains. But hopefully, we all can agree that a moral America is one grounded in: faith, charity, humility and strong families and communities.
  5. Rule of Law. We must re-emphasize that ours is a society in which the law, not men, reign supreme. In addition to – indeed as a companion to freedom, we seek justice. The laws are made by the people and our leaders execute them according to the consent of all who are governed by them. Thus we reject political corruption, crony capitalism, the cult of a leader or leaders, and discrimination – reverse or otherwise.

Who will write the manifesto? The conservative cause needs someone with Levin’s depth of understanding, Krauthammer’s perspicacity, Buckley’s eloquence, Limbaugh’s passion, Churchill’s guts, Reagan’s optimism and the wisdom of a Solomon. Will that person please report to the front desk asap!
______
This essay also appeared in The Intellectual Conservative at: http://intellectualconservative.com/index.php/who-will-compose-a-manifesto

Combatting Conservative Demoralization

American conservatives are in a funk; can we get out of it?

For conservative Americans, this is the winter of our discontent. Scores of articles, books and videos attest to a serious demoralization in the ranks of conservatives in the United States. The causes are easily identified. Arguably, the two main reasons are: the re-election of Barack Obama and the seemingly irreversible implementation of Obamacare following on Chief Justice John Roberts’ surprise defection. However, both of these events herald much more fundamental developments in the political/cultural/social fabric of the nation, which are the true reasons for the depressed state of American conservatives. Therefore, let us list some of the most transparent signs of radical change in American society which, having been recognized and acknowledged by conservatives, engender feelings of despair and lack of hope for the future of the Republic.

  • The explosive and seemingly inexorable growth of the Federal Government, accompanied by unsustainable deficits and debt, is robbing the American people of their liberty, independence and prosperity.
  • The throttling of the country’s economic engine by progressive policies and programs, which have converted economic growth into economic stagnation, signals the end of the American economic miracle and a steady decline into Euro levels of unemployment, lack of opportunity and generational decay.
  • The hollowing out of the military has resulted in an America less able to defend its and its allies’ interests and increasingly
  • Aggressive projection of power by its adversaries (China, Russia, Iran and other Islamic radicals, North Korea).
  • While substantial immigration has traditionally replenished the nation’s energy and enterprise, the country is increasingly flooded with people whose origins – unlike in the past – lie in countries that know little of Western Civilization, British Rule of Law, Dutch free enterprise and the freedoms enshrined in our Bill of Rights. In the resulting environment, it is difficult to sustain adherence to the founding principles of our nation.    
  • In particular, the rapidly growing minority communities in the US align themselves overwhelmingly with statist, collectivist and redistributionist policies that are alien to traditional American values. These communities vote overwhelmingly left rather than right – a trend that appears likely to strengthen as the size of these communities grows.       
  • Finally, the takers now outnumber the makers, with greater imbalances on the horizon. Nearly half of Americans pay no income tax and (a somewhat different) half receive some sort of welfare payment from the federal government. Entrepreneurs are reviled while the “needy” are deemed the soul of the nation.

As a consequence, the US today is a poorer, weaker and less self-confident nation than it has been at any point during the lifetime of any living American. Conservatives observe these signs and attribute the underlying cause to the progressive movement that first gained traction in the US more than a century ago (during the administration of Teddy Roosevelt) and which, in fits and spurts over the 20th century, has nearly completely captured the culture of our nation. Conservatives see the results described in the bullets above as direct consequences and believe that – unless reversed – these developments spell doom for our nation. Of course progressives see it differently. Namely, they consider their century-long success as the salvation of our nation. And alas – the ultimate cause of conservative demoralization – there seem to be more holding the latter opinion than the former, with the disparity growing.

It is enough to bring about the despair that is so manifest in conservative circles. So what is a depressed conservative to do? Give up? Move somewhere else? Or continue to do battle in the hope that the tide can be turned and the nation restored to its traditional moorings? I believe the proper response can be arrived at by answering the following questions:

Is the trajectory that the country has been on for decades truly irreversible? If not, how can it be reversed? If so, then is there any reasonable course of action other than abject surrender?

If one believes that the progressive dominance is not permanent, then one must shake off the demoralization and resume the struggle to restore America. I have written elsewhere about strategies to follow. In short, conservatives should recognize that the progressive “victory” in America unfolded according to the Gramsci game plan: capture the culture, the politics will follow. Conservatives must recapture the culture. It is vital to contest the political battlefield, but the more important places to  concentrate forces are the media, universities, publishing houses, law schools, seminaries, libraries, foundations and of course the public schools – that is, all the opinion-molding organs of society. When the playing field is leveled out in those arenas (or even better tilted back to the right), then the goal of restoring American culture and politics becomes achievable.

If, on the other hand, one believes that the cause is hopelessly lost and the nation inevitably doomed, then one must ponder the unthinkable. Conservatives must begin to formulate plans to carve out a new nation from the wreckage. I have no idea how that can be accomplished peacefully; but let us keep in mind the words of the Declaration of Independence:

Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these
ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute
new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its
powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety
and Happiness.

_____
This essay also appeared in Th Intellectual Conservative at:
http://intellectualconservative.com/index.php/combatting-conservative-demoralization

 

Obama’s Minions and the 2014 Game Plan

Obama’s selections for his second term senior leadership team reveal quite clearly what his game plan is for the next two years – and for the following two, for that matter. His picks, including Susan Rice (thwarted), John Kerry, Chuck Hagel, John Brennan, Jack Lew and Eric Holder, are all cut from the same cloth. In terms of both domestic and foreign policy, they represent the same hard left viewpoint as their boss. They have virtually no private sector experience, no appreciable record of cooperation or accommodation with Republicans or conservatives and a near total fealty to the redistributionist, statist, multicultural, America-denigrating philosophy that animates and motivates our ‘transformational’ president.

Obama enjoyed control of both the executive and legislative branches of government during his first two years in office. He used it to dramatically advance the transformational philosophy that he espouses. His aim is to refashion America away from its traditional founding as a constitutional republic based on individual liberty, free market capitalism, religiously-grounded morality, limited government and a devotion to the ideal of America as a shining example and promoter of freedom throughout the world. Instead he envisions a collectivist, Euro-style social welfare state marked by an overwhelmingly powerful central government, a government–controlled corporate economy, a secular, multicultural populace that favors equality over liberty, and a nation whose place among the nations of the world is no more exalted than any other.

It is true that America has been moving in the direction Obama favors for a century – including several major surges to the left under Wilson, FDR and LBJ. Now Obama means to complete the transformation and during his first two years, he had great success along those lines (Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, two ultra-liberal Supreme Court appointments, gays in the military, among others). But the American people threw a monkey wrench in the works in the 2010 midterm elections. However, unlike Bill Clinton, who – when faced with a similar setback – tacked to the right and actually implemented several center-right initiatives (a balanced budget and welfare reform, e.g.), Obama conceived a different response.

He spent the last two years picking fights with Republicans, castigating conservatives, refusing to cooperate at all with the House’s efforts to reduce the federal debt and deficit, excoriating his electoral opponent and then blaming the Republicans for the ensuing stalemate. It worked – he got re-elected. But, although he retained the Senate, he failed to take the House.

Therefore, the strategy for the next two years is clearly more of the same. The consequences will be dire: the debt explosion will continue; economic stagnation will persist; our foreign enemies will grow stronger and bolder. And Obama believes – likely correctly – that he can lay all the blame on the House Republicans. The goal then is to retake the House in 2014 and then to complete the transformation of America. Should he succeed, in the years 2014-2016, we shall see: cap and trade, a value added tax, card check, amnesty for illegal aliens, a further dramatic military drawdown, and a slew of other collectivist legislation and regulation that will indeed complete the transformation of the country into the United Socialist States of America.

Three final points:

  1. The American people freely chose the route traveled thus far. It is folly to assume that, without some major wake-up call, they will not complete the choice in 2014.
  2. We have seen the future of Obama’s America. It is represented at best by an England that is a zephyr of an international force in comparison to its 300-year history of world power; and at worst by Greece with its declining standard of living, political and cultural paralysis, and civil unrest.
  3. If Congressional Republicans will recognize Obama’s strategy, they might begin to devise some tactics to counter it. Attempts to compromise with Obama will either bear no fruit or, like recent examples, will yield poison fruit that will be blamed on Republicans. Conservatives must articulate to the American people what lies in store for them if Obama succeeds. Hopefully, what remains of traditional America (presumably 53%) will awaken and thwart Obama’s socialist designs for our country.
_____
This article also appeared in The American Thinker at:

Quoting Obama as We Fly Off the Fiscal Cliff

fiscalcliffMany pundits on both sides of the spectrum postulate that we’re going to plunge off the fiscal cliff in part because that is what Obama wants us to do. But too little ink has been devoted to an explanation of why he would harbor that desire. The answer is contained in his most memorable phrase – one whose precise meaning is almost never examined carefully by the American public

On October 31, 2008, Barack Obama declared: ‘We are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States of America.’ Actually, despite his reputation for eloquence, the President has uttered precious few memorable phrases. But the 2008 utterance was indeed memorable. Why? It does not appear that anyone has ever asked him to clarify exactly what transformation he envisioned. From what to what? By what means? And to what effect?

The Left was content that one of their own would occupy the White House and surely, after policies advocated by the new president were implemented, America would look more like the statist, redistributionist, multi-cultural, multi-lateral, Euro-style social welfare state of which they dreamed. The Right understood the remark in exactly the same manner – but in place of joy at the prospect, they were filled with foreboding. However, a huge percentage of Americans – presumably in the middle politically – paid the quote little mind except as it saw Obama’s election heralding the advent of a post-racial, post-partisan, cool new administration, about which they were quite pleased. Those people didn’t give the political ramifications a second thought. And so, amazingly, Obama was not asked to explicate the altered nature of America that he envisioned and which he was determined to bring about.

Even more amazingly, four years later – now that the vision is abundantly clear – a plurality of America is either not paying attention or subscribes to the vision. Furthermore, the vision is brought closer by falling off the cliff. For the vision certainly involves: far higher taxes, even greater government spending, an eviscerated military, government control of business, a ‘fairer’ distribution of wealth and a diminished America. All of which are abetted by our falling off of the fiscal cliff. So why in heaven’s name should Obama strike a deal with his Republican arch-enemies to forestall our plunge? A precipitous dive off the cliff suits his interests, promotes his vision and furthers his transformation of America. Put on your swim goggles and put in your ear plugs. We are all going to be more than a little bit poorer when we hit the water.

This article also appeared in The American Thinker at:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/12/quoting_obama_as_we_fly_off_the_fiscal_cliff_comments.html#disqus_thread