The Populist Pitfall

The work wrought by the Tea Party Movement in the past two years has been tremendous by any standard.  It has been nearly a century since a political movement outside the two main parties has wielded so much influence.  The progressive  populists of Theodore Roosevelt’s Bull Moose Party were the last to rise to such prominence.  Ross Perot’s powerful bid in the 1990’s while spectacular, was primarily a presidential campaign and not one which had any real impact on legislative elections.

This success though brings with it its own dangers.  The Tea Party candidates elected to office are as human as the lifetime legislators that they replaced.  In this they will be as subject to the same temptations to power and avarice as their predecessors.  This alone means that though they come to office full of fire and determination they must be watched carefully.  If the Tea Party movement is sincere, it must be just as watchful and critical of its recently elected officials as it has been of those already in office, Democrat and Republican.

In this the movement must be just as prepared to hoist these new members out of office if they fail to attempt to live up to the standards they campaigned for.  I say attempt because to achieve legislative success on many issues such as tax reform and even repeal or neutering of the health care law will difficult if not impossible.  This is because the preponderance of the legislatures both state and federal are still full of partisans that seem to prefer power to duty.  Yet there is another problem.

The fact that the Tea Party is largely a populist movement has its own dangers.  Any movement which claims as its raison d’être the doing of the will of the people is in peril from the beginning.  The “people” do not exist.  It is a phrase bandied about by those attempting to pull on the emotions of voters by almost everyone in politics, regardless of party.  Yet it has no basis in fact.  There is no will of the people because in a country of 300 million no real consensus on the wisdom of any public policy is possible.  Rather, office seekers and holders repeat “the will of the people” out of habit, not reason or even good sense.

Try getting 25 people together of varied races, religions and backgrounds.  Then try to get a reasonable agreement on policy that some of the may have to pay for and which may or may not affect them all.  The folly that the people have a discernible “will” quickly fades.   This is the pitfall of populism, and populists in general.  The recite the mantra of the people and the people’s will yet it has no solid basis.  Rather, public policy should be based on what is good and reasonable for the maintenance of both order and liberty.  While this may often run parallel to the will of the people, it is not synonymous.

It is true that the populist may be a better executive or legislator than the self serving lifers that we often have.  Yet how much better?  Is it really an improvement to have a campaign and policy driven by whatever the latest poll says that “the people” want?  Are such polls accurate?  What do they really say?

To legislate in that way is the essence of democracy.  The United States of America was not meant to be a democracy.  It was created as a Republic.  Its government was formed in such a way as to protect the country from the tyranny of “the people”.  Sadly much has changed in the last two centuries.

The populist trend in the Tea Party, as well as in the Democrat and Republican parties sounds good as a slogan.  How much good it can do as actual policy may leave much to be desired.

C. L. Ingram

No Respect

As the last post focused on the problem of Libertarian individualism, this one is an accompaniment to  Victor Davis Hanson’s article on Pajamasmedia.  The disregard for law and custom at local, state and federal levels is a terrible symptom of the decay of a society and its governing classes.

It has become astounding how little respect is paid to the system of government and laws we live under, even those most edifying for our society.  Historically it is an American tradition to speak dismissively of the central government, though.  This is perhaps rooted in our experience with the Revolution.  That however was traditionally a public sentiment not a private one.  It was almost a badge of honor to be so manly as to speak out against the “Feds”; especially in some parts of the country.  Yet the private feelings were more often of pride in the accomplishments of our country and a gladness that our government was as good as it was.

All that is now past.  Public and private sentiments have a markedly lower respect for government even as the power of that very government grows almost daily.  The rot is from the top down sadly.  The Obama administration both refuses to execute the laws of the legislature (Defense of Marriage Act) and ignores the very existence of a check on the war making powers of the President (Libya and the War Powers Act).  This is not a specific indictment of the Obama White House any more than similar complaints could be made against any President.  The fact that they are so blatant though is newer.  First, the President began by usurping the authority of Congress and the Supreme Court by declaring parts of DOMA unconstitutional.  No Chief Executive, even if they have acted as though they do, has ever had the power to do that.  Secondly, in giving no real response at all to the 60 day requirement to inform Congress after the Libya action, the President has assumed the mantle of both Executive and Legislative powers in himself.   To say this is disturbing is hardly strong enough.

This is just an example at the top of a phenomenon that can be witnessed in State Houses, Mayors offices, and roadside cafe’s all across the country.  Everywhere, even though the power of government has grown, respect for it has waned proportionally.  It can be debated as to the cause of this.  Perhaps the exponential growth of laws and their often unenforceable nature has made us numb to good laws and bad laws alike.  Perhaps the diversions of post-modern life in the West have grown so great that the old patriotism of true debate about law and government, as well as true accountability has just become too pedestrian to be bothered with.  Greed and the overwhelming self-centeredness of the American people may play a part as well.

Perhaps a force more powerful than liberalism, socialism or conservatism  is to blame.  That force is cynicism.

Bread and circuses may work after all.

C. L. Ingram