Posted on 02/18/2015 3:14:56 AM PST by Jacquerie
The accepted dogma among many conservatives is that the way to save what remains of our republic is to vote conservative, constitutionalist, virtuous men and women into office. History shows that to be a blind alley, a dead end that occupies many minds, all the while evil men get away with high crimes.
It’s a pity that electoral history going back decades have failed to disprove their belief. Most of the conservative candidates we send to congress go wobbly, rino or worse. Meanwhile, no congressional rats ever turn conservative.
Clearly, there is something outside the power of personal character and public virtue that has soured the world’s sweetest experiment in liberty.
The Framers weren’t the first to figure out that the key to liberty was division of power. By 1787, that concept, which is largely forgotten today, was actually old hat.
In 1513, a far lesser known influence on our framing generation began a review of the Roman Republic. Drawing chiefly from Livy’s Histories, Niccolo’ Machiavelli took a fresh look at old models. What he drew as Roman lessons for his contemporary republic of Florence, the maxims therein were well known to our Framers and certainly apply today.
From his Discourses on Livy, of fundamental importance to any republic is a government that “establishes in it to take for granted that all men are evil and that they will always act according to the wickedness of their nature whenever they have the opportunity.”
He drew from the experience of early Romans, whom he credited with regularly improving their republic. In general, it was the key to its longevity. In particular, the constant tension between the few and the many was finely tuned over the centuries. Plebs and nobles had their distinct powers, and when one overstepped its bounds, the other was ready to defend its political turf. Through regular improvements to their republic, Machiavelli described early republican Romans as being on the straight path which could lead them to perfection.
From his perspective, republican Rome’s four hundred year life was a successful quest in the achievement of government perfection.
When challenges arose, Rome didn’t revert to the ages old cycle of monarchy/despotism, followed by aristocracy/oligarchy, and finally republicanism blowing up into anarchy.
Consider similarities with the life-cycle of the American Republic. Like the Romans, we started off under monarchs. Upon independence, we established distinct democratic republics. Soon thereafter, a loose governing structure in the form of a state dominated, (federal) confederation proved strong enough to cast off the British yoke. When that structure proved insufficient to secure peacetime public happiness, the people accepted a new design of government in the form of our Constitution, in which the states thoroughly participated, yet they shared power with representatives of the people. As when Rome established Tribunes of the people, America also followed a straight path toward perfection when it included a House of Representatives in its legislative body.
Further improvements in the form of fine adjustments to the republic followed. These include:
1791. Ten Amendments which acknowledged some God-given and societal rights.
1865. An amendment that eliminated the British imposed institution of slavery.
1868. The 14th Amendment that reinforced personal and societal rights guaranteed in the Declaration and Bill of Rights.
Until 1913, Americans remained on the straight path which could lead them to perfection.
Instead of strengthening the republic in the face of societal and economic change, Americans betrayed themselves. Overnight they weakened the freedom enhancing structure of their government. With the 17th Amendment they tossed confederal government and embraced a democratic republic, which history has shown to be precursor to anarchy, followed by tyranny.
They cut and pasted an inferior popular form over a finely tuned freedom enhancing federal form. Without adjusting enumerated powers which were designed with the assumption that the states would forever participate in congress, America substituted freedom with democracy as it’s central tenet.
There isn’t much time to step back on the straight path to republican perfection. Obama is gathering despotic powers as quickly as he can. Little stands in his way.
Yet, we can avoid the historic cycle of despots, oligarchy, democracy, anarchy. Article V of the Constitution is there, it is within our grasp. We must take it, restore federalism, or join history’s long list of failed republics.
That is an excellent question. Tax squabbles of that sort are what did in the Articles of Confederation. The Constitution was supposed to put an end to such petty economic warfare between the States before it resulted in gunfire.
Oh well. It just goes to prove Sam Francis’ old saw that the Constitution has never interfered with how we run the government. Barky Obama being the ultimate example.
Yes, my state is one of them. It passed virtually entirely along party lines, with all the Chicago machine Dems voting IN FAVOR of an Article V convention, and all the conservative Republicans from downstate voting AGAINST one: http://rockrivertimes.com/2014/12/04/illinois-third-state-to-call-for-constitutional-convention-to-overturn-citizens-united/
Mark Levin and the Chicago Democrat machine that created Obama are on the same side on this issue. Isn't that special?
For those who want to "enpower the states to take back their authority", Illinois is a utopia. Our state government has no qualms whatsoever of acting on its own regardless of what the federal government or its own citizens want, and has over 6,968 units of state government, more than any other state in the union.
Aren't I lucky to have a state legislature that "recognizes its power and stands up to the feds"? They've passed all kinds of other goodies at the state level that the feds won't do, like in-state tuition for illegal aliens. If you want to see what unbridled power at the state level looks like, Illinois is your prime example.
Illinois is more unique than most, I guess. Perhaps the worthy citizens of Illinois are a bit more passive than they ought to be.
The proposing convention vote by Illinois is for the explicit reason of overturning the citizens united decision. We have been discussing a convention to propose an Amendment repealing the 17th Amendment thus restoring one of the provisions of the original Constitution, you are comparing apples and oranges. Of course Democrats want to overturn Citizens United, it breaks their stranglehold on fund raising, but you will never find the dems voting to repeal the 17th Amendment because that is the source of their centralized statist power in Washington DC. And to try to connect Mark Levin to Democrat efforts to overturn Citizens United is pretty pathetic to say the least, but it does prove one thing for certain, none of you progressives can ever be trusted to be completely honest in your arguments.
Libtards are eager to get in there and change the Constitution, they’ve wanted to for years.
Libtard Larry Sabato wrote a book about it before Levin did.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.