Posted on 03/10/2015 6:38:01 AM PDT by iowamark
2015 marks a milestone in American history. One hundred and fifty years ago, Confederate General Robert E. Lee surrendered to General Ulysses S. Grant and ended the Civil War. Shortly thereafter, Orestes Augustus Brownson (1803-1876), a prominent journalist and philosopher, published The American Republic, an erudite defense of the Federal Constitution.
As noted in our Heritage Foundation First Principles essay, today a fresh reading of Brownsons masterwork can give Americans a deeper understanding of their precious civic birthright, the unique federal order that guarantees their personal and political freedom.
Prophetically, Brownson warned that the greatest future threats to the Republic were internal. He called upon his fellow Americans to oppose the relentless centralization of power in Washington; a transformation fueled by a new secular ideologyhumanitarian democracythat would war against all prescriptions and traditions, as well as state and local powers, in the name of equality, and seek to crush all genuine diversity, individual distinctions, and subordinate even personal conscience itself on the altar of a fully secularized, and thus absolute, state.
The Founders genius was in devising a constitutional order that recognized the truth of mans individuality, his flourishing in freedom, and the sacredness of his person, particularly in his relationship to God: The American constitution is not founded on political atheism, but recognizes the rights of man, and therefore, the rights of God.
Today, when Americans of all religious faiths have just cause to fear government assaults on religious liberty, the wisdom of Brownsona devout Catholicis a bounteous benefit for all. Protect the sacred, he warned, from the profane and thus preserve the moral order: If they [government officials] could subject religion to the secular order, or completely secularize the church, they would reduce themselves to the secular order alone, and deprive themselves of all aid from religion. To secularize religion is to nullify it.
While a journalist, urgently writing on contemporary topics in his Quarterly Review, many of his opinions, right or wrong, were exclusively relevant to his own time. However, Brownson also developed a sophisticated and consistent philosophical conservatism that imparted a timeless quality to his observations. Those hard hitting commentaries are strikingly relevant to contemporary America. For example:
The Civil War was a terrible trial for millionsBrownson himself lost two sonsbut the calm courage of the American people prepared them for world leadership:
With larger armies on foot than Napoleon ever commanded, with their line of battle stretching from ocean to ocean, across the whole breadth of the continent, they never, during four long years of alternate victories and defeatsand both unprecedently bloodyor a moment lost their equanimity, or appeared less calm, collected and tranquil, than in ordinary times of peace Their success proves to all that what, prior to the war, was treated as American arrogance or self-conceit, was only the outspoken confidence in their destiny as a providential people, conscious that to them is reserved the hegemony of the world.
That hegemony was moral, not militaristic. Rather it was the success, for the entire world to witness, of Americas providential mission to secure the greatest degree of human liberty under law; a unique experiment in self-government realized through the ingenious Federal Constitution, the priceless gift of Americas Founders. This was a recurrent theme in Brownsons writings. It was a theme that, over a century later, President Ronald Reagan also expressed in his vision of America as a Shining City on a Hill. Brownsons name recognition may be low, but his ideas and insights have endured.
Orestes Augustus Brownson: The American Republic: Its Constitution, Tendencies, and Destiny
The hegemony of the Union and the brutal subjection of the south at the end of the war between the states was the beginning of super-federalism and the beginning of the end for states rights.
This is how I have come to see this aspect of history as well.
It may seem a paradox to class democracy with the barbaric constitutions, and yet as it is defended by many stanch democrats, especially European democrats and revolutionists, and by French and Germans settled in our own country, it is essentially barbaric and anti-republican. The characteristic principle of barbarism is, that power is a private or personal right, and when democrats assert that the elective franchise is a natural right of man, or that it is held by virtue of the fact that the elector is a man, they assert the fundamental principle of barbarism and despotism. This says nothing in favor of restricted suffrage, or against what is called universal suffrage. To restrict suffrage to property-holders helps nothing, theoretically or practically. Property has of itself advantages enough, without clothing its holders with exclusive political rights and privileges, and the laboring classes any day are as trustworthy as the business classes. The wise statesman will never restrict suffrage, or exclude the poorer and more numerous classes from all voice in the government of their country. General suffrage is wise, and if Louis Philippe had had the sense to adopt it, and thus rally the whole nation to the support of his government, he would never have had to encounter the revolution of 1848. The barbarism, the despotism, is not in universal suffrage, but in defending the elective franchise as a private or personal right. It is not a private, but a political right, and, like all political rights, a public trust. Extremes meet, and thus it is that men who imagine that they march at the head of the human race and lead the civilization of the age, are really in principle retrograding to the barbarism of the past, or taking their place with nations on whom the light of civilization has never yet dawned. All is not gold that glisters.
The characteristic of barbarism is, that it makes all authority a private or personal right; and the characteristic of civilization is, that it makes it a public trust. Barbarism knows only persons; civilization asserts and maintains the state. With barbarians the authority of the patriarch is developed simply by way of explication; in civilized states it is developed by way of transformation. Keeping in mind this distinction, it may be maintained that all systems of government, as a simple historical fact, have been developed from the patriarchal. The patriarchal has preceded them all, and it is with the patriarchal that the human race has begun its career. The family or household is not a state, a civil polity, but it is a government, and, historically considered, is the initial or inchoate state as well as the initial or inchoate nation. But its simple direct development gives us barbarism, or what is called Oriental despotism, and which nowhere exists, or can exist, in Christendom. It is found only in pagan and Mohammedan nations;
/excerpt
Thanks for posting. Very interesting.
Bfl
Bookmark
bttt
As I keep saying, Lincoln was the real beginning of the erosion of states’ power and shifting the power to a central seat of power. Some people absolutely will not acknowledge this simple truth.
Prophetically, Brownson warned that the greatest future threats to the Republic were internal. He called upon his fellow Americans to oppose the relentless centralization of power in Washington; a transformation fueled by a new secular ideologyhumanitarian democracythat would war against all prescriptions and traditions, as well as state and local powers, in the name of equality, and seek to crush all genuine diversity, individual distinctions, and subordinate even personal conscience itself on the altar of a fully secularized, and thus absolute, state.
Bookmarking this excellent article.
“thus it is that men who imagine that they march at the head of the human race and lead the civilization of the age, are really in principle retrograding to the barbarism of the past, or taking their place with nations on whom the light of civilization has never yet dawned.”
That is what has happened and continues to happen to us.
Thanks. BUMPING what looks to be a very interesting read.
Yes, every major war left the general government with more power.
Its a pity the framers didn't make an allowance for dictators to deal with emergencies, which served the Roman Republic so well.
You apparently are not aware that Brownson was anti-slavery and pro-Union and was scandalized by other Catholics who were pro-Confederacy.
And yes, Orestes Brownson was a conservative.
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.