Restore the Future: The Second American Revolution

Contents

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER 1

CHAPTER 2

CHAPTER 3

CHAPTER 4

CHAPTER 5

CHAPTER 6

CHAPTER 7

CHAPTER 8

CHAPTER 9

CHAPTER 10

REFERENCES

This book is dedicated to the following members of my family – my wife, Karen, who encouraged me to write this book; our sons, Rob and Ryan, of whom we will always be extremely proud and who represent our enduring legacy; our grandchildren; and my parents, Ellen and Don Young, who provided tremendous educational and developmental opportunities for me.

It is also dedicated to all of you. I love this country and the opportunities it has provided for me, but I am extremely concerned that these opportunities will not exist for our children and grandchildren. After reading this book, I hope you will join me in the enormous but critical effort to Restore the Future through the Second American Revolution.

Introduction

The budget should be balanced, the Treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed lest Rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.

Cicero

Roman philosopher – 55 BC

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.

Sun Tzu

Chinese military general and strategist

For the first time in American history, a self-induced shadow has fallen over the American future. Whether this is a permanent change or something like an eclipse will depend on the policies we adopt over the next few years.

The economic growth potential for this country is being revised down by economists. Relatively high rates of unemployment may become the new normal, because economic growth is so anemic. Only half the people pay taxes. Competition is increasing on a global basis. A long-term decline in the value of the dollar may be under way. The people are deeply divided over the future direction of the country, and the resulting malaise is tremendously counter-productive to a dynamic future. Our position as a global super power may be slipping.

In this environment, it may be increasingly difficult for our children and grandchildren to achieve their dreams.

The purpose of this book is to galvanize the American people to Restore the Future by becoming participants in a Second American Revolution (non-violent). The objectives of this Revolution are to:

• Restore the Constitution to its critical role in our society as one of our key founding documents.

• Roll back all the changes in our government that have been justified by the view that the Constitution is a living document.

• Revitalize the American people to demand a future for their children and grandchildren which will both inspire and reward them

• Bring back the hope and opportunity which have always characterized American society.

Chapter 1 provides a brief review of forms of government and makes the point that our founding documents created the pinnacle of the development of government at that time. Nothing that has happened in this country or around the world has improved on that form of government and the rationale for its creation which were put in place over 220 years ago.

Chapter 2 follows the outline of the Declaration of Independence in presenting a long list of grievances which demonstrate how far we have moved away from the founding documents and providing the reasons why calling for a Second Revolution which will restore them to their central role is so vital at this time.

Chapter 3 discusses religion, the elemental morality it provides, and the importance of morality to the necessary function of society. The beliefs of the Founding Fathers were that: (1) a superior being exists, (2) natural rights uniquely come from the superior being, and (3) a government must be created with the primary purpose of protecting these rights.

Chapter 4 provides an analysis of the extent to which the limited government created by the Founders is alive and well today.

Chapter 5 discusses the essential nature of liberty, how it is different from a related concept called freedom, and why expanding liberty should be one of the few primary responsibilities of government.

Chapter 6 outlines the derivation and the importance of the Rule of Law to the fundamental functioning of a society.

Chapter 7 discusses the critical role of national defense and why, like expanding liberty, national defense should be one of the few primary responsibilities of government.

Chapter 8 reviews the key role played by education in maintaining the position of this country in the world and the risks we are running as a result of the poor quality of our education relative to that of the rest of the world.

Chapter 9 outlines the rationale for and critical importance of free enterprise and free trade and why free enterprise is the greatest engine for economic growth and development ever created.

Chapter 10 outlines what each citizen should do to enlist in the Second American Revolution and Restore the Future.

As the quotation from Cicero at the beginning of the Introduction demonstrates, this is not the first time someone has asked for a return to the basic elements of good government. The difference for us 2,066 years later is that we have founding documents which provide the structure for the best government ever created by man, and we should demand that those documents and that government be reinstated.

The quotation from Sun Tzu emphasizes the importance of knowing your enemy and knowing yourself and thus greatly increasing your chance for success in this Revolution. This book will help you do both.

Chapter 1

The Role of Government

That Government is Best Which Governs Least

Henry David Thoreau

Background

In principle, men and women have two choices in the way they live their lives. Either they live by themselves or in independent family groups, or they live as a part of a larger society. If they live by themselves, they must provide from their own resources the food they eat, whatever medical care they require, the clothes they wear, the dwellings in which they live, and their defense against predators. They are entirely free, and they have no obligations to anyone other than themselves or their families. This is a formidable list of individual responsibilities, and it is not clear that many people have lived this way.

In fact, many philosophers doubt that they have. As David Hume says in his A Treatise of Human Nature (1739), human beings are naturally social: ’Tis utterly impossible for men to remain any considerable time in that savage condition, which precedes society; but that his very first state and situation may justly be esteem’d social. This, however, hinders not, but that philosophers may, if they please, extend their reasoning to the suppos’d state of nature; provided they allow it to be a mere philosophical fiction, which never had, and never cou’d have any reality.¹

If people live as part of a society, there are economies of scale in food production, because food is generally produced communally, and there is a joint commitment to national defense for protection of the whole society. In any society, people give up some of the absolute freedoms they might have had in what the French philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau called a state of nature, but they gain more liberty to pursue more fully their individual interests. The difference between freedom and liberty is discussed in Chapter 5.

To expand their liberty, people decide to participate in what amounts to a contract with the society. They commit to participate in the society in certain ways, and they expect certain things in return. Rousseau called this the Social Contract.

The heart of the idea of the social contract may be stated simply: Each of us puts his person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will, and, in our corporate capacity, we receive each member as an indivisible part of the whole.²

One of the best examples of a social contract is the Mayflower Compact. There were two distinct groups on the Mayflower, and there were sharp differences of opinion between the groups about the form of government which should be established once they landed in the New World and began to set up a society. They agreed to a set of rules while still on the ship, which they called a Compact. They each gave up some of the things they might have enjoyed if they had decided to live in separate groups in the interest of establishing a durable and successful society which provided much more liberty.

It is one thing to recognize that people live in societies, but it is obvious to everyone that the actual creation of societies in recorded history has produced a broad range of outcomes. In primitive societies, there was a chief, who had all the power, and his followers. Sadly, this approach still exists today in parts of the world. In ancient Greece, there were attempts to create a pure democracy, in which whatever was done was the result of the decision of a simple majority of all the citizens. This proved to be unworkable and impractical when the population grew beyond a certain point.

There have been dictators and tyrants. There have been hereditary monarchies. There are theocracies, in which the leaders are leaders because religion puts them there. There have been socialism and communism. There have even been combinations of these separate approaches. As varied as the actual societies have turned out to be, they are still societies, in the sense that they are all alternatives to the state of nature.

By definition, societies to function at all must have certain rules, or laws, to establish both how men should conduct themselves to remain a member of the society and what happens to them if they don’t follow the rules. The laws are fundamental to the concept of society.

The principal differences among all of these societies are in the laws by which they function. In primitive societies, the laws are established by the alpha male, as is the case with many groups of animals. In others, the rules are established by whoever has the military power. In many modern societies, the rules are established by the people in the society themselves and not imposed on them. To be effective for any society to function, the rules must be clear, and they must be enforced.

The development of concepts of individual rights and laws to protect those rights for those who participate in a social contract has been evolutionary and not without setbacks and disruption. What we can see is that the leading ideas about these concepts today are clearly not those of the American Indians, the Egyptians, Attila the Hun, or, for that matter, the Nazis or the Russians. This evolutionary process has never been driven by a motivation to reject the social contract and try something else, but rather by a motivation to make it represent better the original purpose for which it is created, as described above.

By the eighteenth century, concepts of individual rights were being developed, and primitive laws to protect them were being established. At the time, the best thinking in what today would be called the western world was that the rights came from the monarch. In some indirect sense, they may have come from a supreme being, but the monarch, in any case, was the one who translated the divine intention. This situation was commonly referred to as the divine right of kings.

The American Revolution, with the philosophical background largely established by a group of Scottish philosophers, changed all that. John Locke, for example, in his Second Treatise on Government sounded the charge. His view was that:

• All men are endowed by a supreme being with natural rights which are an integral part of the fact that they are humans. Regardless of the society in which one finds himself, these rights are still the same and are not defined by that society. These rights include life, liberty, and property.

• Governments are instituted among men for the sole purpose of protecting and advancing those rights.

• If governments fail to do so, they can be, and possibly should be, overthrown.

Here is what Thomas Jefferson said in the Declaration of Independence, which is a direct reflection of the view of Locke:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness [John Locke’s property] – That to secure these rights, 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.

The rules for organizing society and a government took a great leap forward with the signing of the Declaration of Independence and the creation of the Constitution. In addition to the requirements indicated above, of recognizing natural rights and creating a government to enforce them, the rules for enforcing them now were designed to be created by the people and to be productive of their collective interests. To make sure that this happens in fact as well as on paper, the Founders created a representative democracy.

The Constitution by itself does not address what the individual rights are. These are expressed in the Bill of Rights, which consists of the first ten amendments to the Constitution and which was passed into law on 12/15/1791.

James Madison said in Federalist #50, If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself. A dependence on the people is, no doubt, the primary control on the government; but experience has taught mankind the necessity of auxiliary precautions.

The Founders had this famous saying in mind when they constructed a government with appropriate checks and balances, limited and specifically enumerated powers for the federal government, and reliance on the people for its on-going authority. The government was subordinate to the people and not the other way around. The representatives elected by the people worked for the people; the people did not work for the representatives.

In my opinion, this is the pinnacle so far in the evolution of the role of government in a society. No alternative approach has been developed anywhere in the world in more than 220 years which comes close to the comprehensiveness, effectiveness, and legitimacy of the American approach. Many other approaches have been tried and failed – Nazism, communism, socialism, and totalitarianism have all failed to meet the standard set by the founding documents. In fact, many of the emerging nations around the world today are struggling toward the American approach and trying not to reinvent the wheel by pursuing some of the approaches to establishing a government which have already failed.

It is irrelevant to suggest that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights were created by white men, some of whom were slave owners, and did not address certain problems, including slavery and universal suffrage. As most readers of American history know, without the southern states there would not have been a successful revolution. The southern states would not have joined the new government if the Constitution had tried to address the issue of slavery directly. In fact, agreement was reached to end slavery in 1815, although it clearly wasn’t effective.

The important point is that we have a unique country today not only because of what the Founders did at the time, but because they put in place a philosophical framework which allowed the issues of slavery and universal suffrage to be addressed eventually in the context of the Constitution which they created. Do you think for a moment that these issues were addressed by appeals to anything else? Isn’t it true that the philosophical foundation for addressing these and other problems was already in place?

Why is this the pinnacle? Because the basic ideas around which the American Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and our form of government were constructed were totally unprecedented at that time in world history and are as valid today as they were 220 years ago.

• The rights of individuals

• The liberty to exercise those rights

• Freedom of speech

• Freedom of religion

• Government of the people, by the people, and for the people

• Limited federal government with carefully enumerated powers

• Commitment to strong national defense

• Freedom of the press

• The right to a trial by a jury of one’s peers with the presumption of innocence

• Property rights

The approach we have developed does make America a special place, and, as a result, people of all races and nationalities are still flocking to this country to live and work and to ultimately become American citizens. However, I have to stress here that while our approach has set the standard, our system of government is not unique. We don’t have a monopoly on it, and any nation can imitate it and try to improve it whenever it wants.

Since, as described above, changes in the role of government in societies have been evolutionary, it would be presumptuous to believe that our state-of-the art in government today cannot be improved. At this point, however, it is not clear what the evolutionary improvements would be, and it is quite clear in any case that they are not in evidence at this point.

Not only has no other nation succeeded in raising the bar by improving our system of government, but we have not in a fundamental sense done so either. It is truly remarkable that 220 years after its creation we are still trying to follow its basic principles and design.

We have a tripartite government, separation of powers, a bicameral legislature, free elections of the President and our representatives, changes in government based on specified procedures and unaccompanied by violence, and trial by a jury of one’s peers with the presumption of innocence, all very much as the Founders designed them. Even in rare situations, such as the impeachment of a sitting president, we follow the rules created in the Constitution to the letter.

In short, our Constitution has stood the test of time, which is a real tribute to the remarkable creativity and vision of the