Why The Conservatives Keep On Losing And The Collectivists Are On A 120 year Winning Streak

 

By

 

Joseph W. Gabriele

 

 

 

The Democrats recently got their comprehensive health care bill passed. It was the culmination of a hundred year old dream first proposed by Teddy Roosevelt in 1912. A well known TV host, Glenn Beck, said that we (conservatives) had lost a battle but hadn’t lost the war. It got me to thinking; why have the Democrats (Progressives, Collectivists, Socialists, Communists, Altruists, etc.) been so successful, in America, for the last 120 years? The short answer is that they have been consistent in their message of greater government control over the lives of individual citizens while their opponents have been inconsistent in their defense of Individual Rights. Their opposition has never reversed or stopped even a single power grab. Indeed, over the past several decades they have jumped onto the bandwagon.

 

The Collectivists have gotten their way by passing laws which have little or no immediate impact in the lives of the majority of citizens but allow future administrations to exercise virtually unlimited power. This approach also saddles future generations with crushing debt.

 

The Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 laid down the concept that private commercial property could be fined or seized in the name of competition without defining competition. That’s just the way the Progressives wanted it: Businessmen are held to their arbitrary judgments finding out what is illegal after the deal is done. Notice the seizure or control of company after company in the current (Obama) administration.

 

The Income Tax Act (16th Amendment) laid down the concept that the income of individuals belonged to the government and what they leave you of what you have earned comes from the goodness of their hearts. The initial rate was quite low at 1%. Today Federal income taxes are approaching 40%. There exists no legal limit to how much of an individual’s income the government can seize.

 

The direct election of Senators (17th Amendment) is, perhaps, the most subtle and most destructive act of the Progressives. Enacted in 1913, along with the Income Tax Act, it fundamentally altered the balance of power in America. The Founding Fathers were fearful of concentrated power. Their goal of keeping the federal government limited was accomplished by diffusing the power in this manner: The President would represent the Federal Government; The House of Representatives would represent the People; and the Senate would represent the States. Article 1 Section 3 of the US Constitution states that: “The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote”. This tug and pull of three power centers helped keep the federal government limited from 1792 to 1913. Senators voted as their respective Legislatures wanted them to vote. This was a much better system than having Senators depend on large companies, industries, wealthy donors, and lobbyists for contributions and directions on how to vote. With the power of the States severely curtailed, presidents, especially since the 1930’s, have acted more like kings than presidents in an ever increasing manner.

 

The Social Security Act of 1935 laid down the concept that a senior citizen's survival after retirement would be controlled by the government and all citizens forced to pay into the system. The first recipient, Ida Fuller, paid in approximately $27.00 and received $22,888 in benefits. This is the very definition of a Ponzi scheme and is now near collapse.

 

The Medicare Act of 1965 laid down the concept that the health care of senior citizens and the poor would be under the control of the government. It too is bankrupt and near collapse.

 

The Patriot Act of 2006 decimated the fourth amendment to the Constitution. It laid down the concept that omnipotent government could and would strip citizens of their right to privacy. The 4th Amendment reads: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” This too was sold to the public under the disguise that if you weren’t a terrorist, you had nothing to fear. Government control over the lives of its citizens had again grown.

 

The Health Care Reform Bill of 2010 lays down the concept that the government can and will seize all present and future wealth and herd all citizens into a concentration camp of total control. America has, finally, been “fundamentally transformed” into a people of the government, by the government, and for the government.

 

The consistent message of those who believe that the Collective is more important than the Individual is: Government owns you.

 

 

Those Conservatives who are Christians have been inconsistent as to the divide between Individual Rights and Collective Rights. The reason is they believe that God imbues us with a uniquely identifiable soul. Hence our rights are God given and cannot be taken away because government, in their view, is clearly inferior to God. They reject the notion that Government owns you because they believe, deeply, that God owns you. Two thousand years ago Jesus said that citizens should “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesars and unto God that which is Gods”. This begs the question: What should the Individual render unto himself out of the fruits of his labor? I believe that he should render unto himself all of the fruits of his labor save for what is necessary to support a limited government plus that portion which he chooses to give to charity, religion or anyone else.

 

There can exist two, and only two, kinds of society or government: One that holds the Individual as its highest value or one that holds the Collective as its highest value. Either it has Individual Rights or it has Collective Rights. It cannot have both. All attempts to mix both have resulted in the diminishment of Individual Rights as shown above. America is the only example of a country begun with an explicit commitment to Individual Rights. Examples of Collectivist Government are numerous: Tribes, Monarchies, Communism, Socialism, Fascism, Imperialism, and Pure Democracy (The unlimited rule of the majority). Discussions of Left and Right, Conservatives and Progressives, are misleading at best. Arguments about whether America is Center-Right or Center-Left are, likewise, useless since the rights guaranteed in our constitution are absolute and cannot be bargained or compromised away. What portion of a man’s Life, Liberty, Happiness and Property can be taken away such that he can still be considered free? I would argue that civilization is a march from Collective Power toward Individual Rights and only America has most fully achieved the journey.

 

 

    

Collective►-----------------------------------►Individual

Power                                       Rights

 

    

 

 

     Now we are witnessing the dismantling of those rights. Our Bill Of Rights have been under attack for the last 120 years. The crucial question to be answered is: Where do our rights come from? Christians will argue that they come from God. The Collectivists will argue that our rights come from Government. I think that they come from Human Nature. That is, creatures like us who are capable of creating Arts, Science, Technology, and the Law ought not to be enslaved to God or Man. Our Individual Rights are derived from our Nature as humans and these rights are inviolate and absolute.

 

The only solution at this late date is to push for a complete re-alignment of our political parties. What’s needed is to establish an Individual Rights party and a Collectivist party. The Individual Rights party would base its platform on the first ten amendments of our constitution plus some needed changes limiting the size and power of the federal government by curtailing its ability to incur debt, print fiat currency, interfere in the economy, repealing the 17th amendment, to begin with.

 

The Collectivists would continue to push their Progressive agenda of more government, more nationalization of sectors of the economy, more destruction of individual rights, more confiscation of private property, and more hatred of the profit motive.

 

     If these two choices were to be put to the American voters, clearly and forthrightly, then we could make a decision as to what kind of a country we want for ourselves and for our children.

 

 

 

 

    

Copyright @2010 Joseph W. Gabriele. All rights reserved.
Comments? Send them to the author