It seems in many ways that democracy, where the majority rules over the minority, is indeed where we are today. Our Founders established a federated republic wherein the federal government was given a few limited powers. Does our government today look like a government of a few limited powers? Not hardly. Over time our government has usurped more and more power away from the states and the people and concentrated it in the central government where the elite few rule over us all.
This degeneration into democracy has not been limited to only the Federal government. One only need look a California and some other states to see how the majority is running roughshod over the minority.
This is the nature of all governments over all time; to grow and to become more and more powerful. This , of course, has led to many a revolution followed by new attempts at self governance. Here in America our Founders were well aware of the nature of governments. They established a constitution whereby a government would be formed for the purpose of protecting the God-given rights of the American people. The Founders wrote a constitution delegating to the Federal government a few enumerated powers and declared that all other power resided in the states and the people. The Founders warned the people time and time again that they would have to be ever vigilant against the natural tendency of government to usurp more and more power for itself.
Quite obviously, we Americans were not sufficiently vigilant. As a result, we have the Federal government that we have today and states like California are in the mess that they are. The question on the minds of many from the conservative/libertarian side is _ is it too late? Have we passed the point of no return? Or, can we still reclaim and reestablish the limited government that our Founders envisioned?
When one looks at the enormity of the task it does seem overwhelming. There are millions, if not billions of laws and regulations that are intended to control every aspect of our lives that must be undone. Our government has granted entitlements to the people that it can not deliver and in so doing it has accumulated a debt that soon can not be serviced. This monstrous government was built a few bricks at a time. Will we have to dismantle this government a few bricks at a time or do we need to bring in the wrecking ball? I don’t know. What I do know is two things. First, if you go into a conflict believing you have already lost, you will. Second, before we will even have a chance to restructure this government , we must first win the battle for the minds of the voters. To gain the control we need to make the changes that must be made, we have to win over the majority of three groups of voters: The independents, the indifferents (the mushy middle) and, lastly the CINOs (Conservatives In Name Only).
If we were to plow through recent Pew Research pols or Rasmussen Report polls, we would find that the majority of voters support downsizing the government and the reduction of government spending. Those that call themselves conservatives are growing in number. However, when these conservatives are asked about reforming Social Security or Medicare, the majority of these “conservatives” are not in favor of making drastic changes. Therefore, the term CINOs applies.
(borrowed from The Daily Callers Cartoons.)
If we can not win over the three groups that I have identified, then we lose. One of the things we conservative/libertarians are often accused of is being too negative in our arguments. So, how do we win them over? I recently came across a Heritage Foundation article written by Lawrence Reed back on June 21, 2004, that may offer some ideas that will help us. The article is titled “Why Limit Government?”. It is an excellent article in its own right bu for now I’m most interested in Mr. Reed’s recommendations which I share with you here:
Recommendations
With an eye toward strengthening our efforts to limit government, let me offer these brief tidbits, each of which is worthy of much greater discussion and many more specific examples than I have time for here:
- Our side must work harder to relate to real people.No green eyeshades, dollars-and-cents-only stuff. We have to show how limiting government actually improves lives. We must put a human face on the issue by not only showing how runaway government inflicts real harm on real people, but also how the free society can produce a more abundant life for all.
- Our side must get smarter with our rhetoric.We should not allow ourselves to get bogged down in debating the fine points of every proposed government expansion. We need to remind people that government, as a share of our personal income, is consuming five or six times what it did a century ago. We should be demanding to know from our Big Government friends why that is not yet enough. We should embarrass them by asking them to publicly reveal how much more they really want, and at what point they will finally acknowledge that what a person earns belongs fundamentally to him, and not to the government.
- Our side must be strategic,investing more in the issues in which small victories can mean a lot. Issues that come to mind are school choice, private retirement accounts, and state government budgets. When we win those battles, we will start to win across a broad front of issues.
- Our side must be convinced that it can win. We must be optimists. Pessimism is not only unwarranted, it is also a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you think the cause is lost, it will be. No one works hard for a cause they think will lose. We need to convince the world that if anything in human affairs is inevitable, it is that humans will be the free beings their Maker intended. It is not inevitable that they will be ruled by know-it-alls. History is on the side of liberty, not statism.
In other words, limiting government is a lofty endeavor. It’s good, honest work. It’s a powerful message when presented well.
I think Mr. Reed is right on the money. What do you think? Would you add anything to his list?
Grant Davies
April 15, 2011
” The question on the minds of many from the conservative/libertarian side is _ is it too late? Have we passed the point of no return? Or, can we still reclaim and reestablish the limited government that our Founders envisioned?”
Indeed, that is the question. I wish I knew the answer.
Conservatives on Fire
April 15, 2011
I think we have to come up with some new approaches because what we have done in the past isn’t working all that well.
Pat
April 15, 2011
Mr. Reed is spot on. Republicans and libertarians have always come up short in arguments with progressives and Dems because, despite their inflated self-image as intellectuals, their arguments are the easy ones to put on bumper stickers. They’re easy bumper sticker fodder because they are so unrealistically simplistic. “Tax the rich” is an easy argument to make, because you can play to irrational emotion. The argument that taxing the rich takes money from the private sector, which would otherwise be invested and spent in other businesses, thereby increasing economic activity and reducing the need for government support for the poor… That’s a tougher argument to make. To make it, you have to have real knowledge of economics, and to understand it, you have to have real intellect.
To win, we have to figure out how to distill our arguments down to easily grasped concepts. Ryan seems to be on the right path. “Reforming Medicare saves it. If we don’t reform it, it will collapse and everyone who needs it will suffer.” “This is the most predictable economic collapse in history. We know what is going to happen, why it’s happening, and when it will happen. Knowing that, how can we do nothing. What do you say about people who recommend doing nothing?
I’ve been on the “we need great bumper stickers” kick for a while. One of my favorites is: “Republicans believe in the people. Democrats believe in government.” Another is “Do you really want more bureaucracy in your life?” How about, “Republicans believe your earnings belong to you. Democrats believe your earnings belong to the government and they generously let you keep some.” Even old stand-bys: “A poor man never gave anyone a job.”
Lately people have compiled data that backs up statements like this: “Taking all the money from the rich would barely cover one year of government spending.” (go here: http://freemktproject.com/?p=983 to see the video explaining it).
We can win. We have to be willing to explain our position, and call Dems out on their lies and misrepresentations.
Conservatives on Fire
April 15, 2011
I think you are on to something, Pat. How about some of these.
_ If you like high gas prices, vote for Obama
_ If you like inflation, vote for Obama
_ If you like no job opportunities, vote for Obama
_ If you like your public schools, vote for Obama.
_ If you like sahria law, Vote for Obama
_ If you like seeing your country invaded by illegal immigrants, vote for Obama
Pat
April 15, 2011
How about, “High gas prices IS the Obama energy plan.” or “Obama creates more debt in one month than Bush did in a whole year. (Feb 2011 vs 2007)”
I also like things that trash bureaucrats… NOBODY likes bureaucrats. Even Democrats don’t like bureaucrats… it’s just that the super intelligent progressives don’t realize that expanded government means (wait for it…) MORE BUREAUCRATS!
Or, how about “If the US Government was a business, would you invest in it?”
Conservatives on Fire
April 16, 2011
““If the US Government was a business, would you invest in it?”
That is goood!
fleeceme
April 15, 2011
I like the recommendations, but don’t we in some way already do this? Long held is the conservative statement, “Would you want the Department of Motor Vehicles running your healthcare?” That is a pretty simple but powerful statement of the sheer ineptitude of government, people understand long lines, waiting for no damn reason, and the complete lack of interest in government workers. Maybe that is the key?
Conservatives are pretty logical people, but most people don’t like to trigger the logic portion of their brain accept when trying to choose who to vote for on American Idol. We need to tie the advantages of the conservative message to what marketers call value propositions. These values are usually, low-price, time-saving, convenience, security….and another one I can’t think of.
Security – maybe a video of Obama bouncing the “first pitch” to the catcher in his version of a girly toss, with the obvious question, “You want this guy in charge of our badasses in the military?”
Convenience – no brainer, anything relating to bureaucracy, Maybe another video of numerous people waiting in line at what looks like a typical DMV, but as we follow the main character, who finally gets his number called after a 3 hour wait, we see behind the counter, a receptionist in nurse smocks, who quickly tells him he doesn’t have the right paperwork. Oops, another three hour wait.
I ain’t no marketing genius, just some ideas.
Conservatives on Fire
April 16, 2011
A video of people waiting in line for health care; that’s a great idea!
Matt
April 15, 2011
This is great-both the post and comments. Simply put, we need to communicate our ideas in a way that other people will get. We understand and appreciate the nuts and bolts stuff, those that have not educated themselves to the issues will tune them out.
Conservatives on Fire
April 16, 2011
There is a large segment of society that is tuned-out. We may have a chance with them if we keep our messages simple. There are others that talk the talk but when we talk about entitlements, they’re no longer with us (the reason for the cartoon). For these people we need a new and more powerful message to get them more concerned about their children and grandchildren than their own immediate needs.
John Scotus
April 15, 2011
It takes no effort to let the world around you go to Hell. However, it takes time and energy to change things in society. This is where conservatives lost the edge–they were out-hustled and out-maneuvered by the other side. Conservatives ceded ground in nearly all areas of society by not getting involved, by not stating their case, by not sticking up for what was right, and by not exercising their rights. And, when they did try to get involved, they did so in stupid ways, by supporting demagogues instead of politicians of principle, by getting embroiled in petty issues and losing sight of the big picture, by being single-issue conservatives, and by taking the my-way-or-the-highway approach to politics and refusing to cooperate with others in order to get the job done.
As a long-term American expat who happens to live in exactly the kind of dystopian country that Obama and the left want to turn America into, I see that America has certain values that need to be preserved and cherished, but this takes hard work.
Right now, people are upset because their pocketbooks are being hurt. While it is good that they have started to wake up, this is more than about merely pocketbook issues–the whole future of a country is at stake. If the economy improves and employment goes back up, Obama may well be re-elected. However, the same dynamics–and danger to America–will be present. Will people go back to sleep and stop caring because they are well fed, or will they do the hard work to take America back?
Marketing and bumper stickers are not the answers–the answers are persuasion and the willingness to get involved in the nuts and bolts of politics and society once again. You can’t say that public schools are bad, for example, or that all politicians are evil and all parties are the same, and then just walk away without doing anything, without trying to affect change. Yet, this is exactly what so many people did. Conservatives have to get re-engaged. You have to play the game in order to win.
Conservatives on Fire
April 16, 2011
I hear you loud and clear, John. I too am a long time ex-pat, living under Hugo Chavez. But my take is a little different. I don’t know what critical mass we need to be engaged and involved. Not a majority I should think. The Revolutionary war only had the support of about 3% of the population at that time. The Liberals have, with maybe 20+%, done their damage very skillfully over the last one hundred years. Clearly we don’t have 100 years to turn this situation around. The Tea Parties and the number of conservative bloggers tells me we have many more people engaged and involved than we have had for a very long time. However, there is still a large segment of our population that are tuned-out and as the last three years has shown, we can’t keep their attention long enough to persuade them of anything. So, if marketing and bumper stickers are a way to get their votes, why not?
John Carey
April 16, 2011
Great post Jim. The point many people miss is that the founders believed that even a government at its best was imperfect. Knowing this, it boggles the mind why the people seek answers to their questions from this imperfect entity. The founders knew the solutions would be found in the people not the government. Over the years, we have somehow lost our way and allowed a limited imperfect government based of republic principles to morph into an overreaching larger imperfect government base on democracy. Democracy have never worked because eventually the 49 percent that are getting screwed by the 51 percent say enough is enough. This is why most democracies end in civil war. You are correct when you say the founders knew this about democracies. This is why they chose the a form of government that was closer to a republic. Actually the articles of confederation were much closer to a republic style government. Anyway I ramble on here. Great post.
Conservatives on Fire
April 16, 2011
Thanks, John. You described the facts much better than I did. Now we have to look for new ways to get our message across.
Bob Mack
April 16, 2011
Never forget the role of the judiciary in the degeneration of the Republic. It’s not just an ill-informed electorate that must be overcome.
Conservatives on Fire
April 16, 2011
Great point. Federal judges usurped power they don’t have under the constitution
nooneofanyimport
April 16, 2011
Is it too late? This indeed is the question of the hour.
When I need to feel encouraged, I think of places like Hungary. They still have their problems. But being directly controlled by the USSR did not destroy them. They grew exponentially after the fall of the USSR. They even florished during Soviet control, at least compared to many satellite nations–Goulash Communism.
If the Hungarians can survive, we can to. It is not too late.
Now, onto how we reclaim the republic. This is a long haul, not something to be fixed with smarter rhetoric in the next election cycle. What we need to recognize is the cultural shift that must be undone.
Even conservatives are now often colored by the cultural shift toward collective action. In our everyday lives, we seek the opinion and decision of experts instead of relying on ourselves. This shift manifests itself in the choice to complain to our homeowner’s association, or landlord, or even local police, instead of working it out directly with our neighbors.
Or the choice of a local community council to raise dues for a “neighborhood watch” person on salary, when we could remember to lock our own doors and have the ability to defend ourselves. Or the habit of calling CPS instead of investigating (and possibly rectifying) a child endangerment situation ourselves.
Even in a military housing community, I see folks looking to the housing office to solve problems they could easily solve themselves.
We reclaim the republic by reclaiming our responsibility over the details of our own lives. You and I already understand this. Hopefully we can teach enough of the others, and our own children.
Cheers!
Conservatives on Fire
April 16, 2011
Great comment, Linda. Without a doubt people should look first at what they can do for themselves. We have always been a generous people, but one should never abuse the generousity of others or allow our generousity to be mandated.
Cheers!