Has the time finally come to intervene in the extended Syrian multi-sided civil war? After tens of thousands of deaths, shifting allegiances and numerous inept attempts at brinkmanship, the U.S. seems poised to engage in military involvement into yet another middle east morass. The ‘red line’ of the use of chemical weapons appears to have been crossed. Is that why Pres. Obama and his administration are in a rush to bomb Syria?
Saddam Hussein had used chemical weapons on countless thousands of his own people, but the very credible threat (at the time) that he was prepared to do it again wasn't justification for war or military engagement according to Obama then. Why is this situation different and how?
Pres. Obama has repeatedly excoriated Pres. Bush for our involvement the Iraq war, which had congressional authorization, as well as overwhelming UN approval. Now he wants to commit the U.S. military to a course of action on Syria because someone there used chemical weapons in the midst of an ongoing multi-party civil war. And he seems prepared to do it without congressional approval or involvement.
Where is the clear and convincing evidence that the Assad regime is responsible?
Where is the evidence that involvement of our military will help? And whom will we be helping, Assad, the Syrian people or al-Qaeda?
Does anyone doubt that the vicious, murdering al-Qaeda terrorists and their thug friends would sacrifice a few thousand Syrians to place blame on the Assad administration? I'm not suggesting by any means that Assad and his cronies are innocent, but I haven't seen any compelling reason why we should intercede in Syria at all, let alone without a clear path to success. At this point, no one can even define what success would actually be in this situation.
I could care less that the UN approves of military engagement. American citizens and the U.S. Congress are the first people who need to be consulted on this decision, in that order. Then Israel and maybe our other allies. The Muslim Brotherhood is definitely and decidedly not our ally, so they don't make the cut at all.
If the French and British want to intervene, as the news reports, then why not let them? Both countries have formidable militaries of their own, including cruise missiles. Saudi Arabia has an American-supplied air force, as do several other regional powers. Can't they drop a few bombs to save Syrian lives, if that's really what's at stake here.
We are told that the Free Syrian Army, ostensibly the ‘real’ Syrians, are in desperate need of financial support. I can think of several extremely wealthy arab nations that have a vested interest in a stable middle east, including Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Let them open up their treasuries.
Here's a bizarre idea, if we really want to open the hand of cooperation with Iran and Russia, let's get them involved. Invite them to intervene on behalf of the Syrian people. After all, aren't the Syrians supposed to be their sworn allies? What better way to forge a bond with those governments than to work together to help stop the slaughter of innocent Syrians that apparently so many people suddenly seem to have developed a deep and abiding concern for? Isn't Pres. Obama all for a wide open foreign policy with direct engagement of governments that are either openly or subversively hostile to us? Doesn’t the Iranian government keep telling us how peaceful their intentions are? Can’t Pres. Obama simply persuade them to launch a few of those sophisticated missiles that they’ve developed at these dastardly chemical weapon-wielding villains in a show of their ‘good will’ toward fellow man?
I'm really not trying to be snarky or insensitive. I care deeply that people are being killed, maimed and tortured in Syria and many other places around the world. It is tragic and unacceptable, and I pray for them all. But if we are going to put more people in harms way, both Americans and others, I think that we should have a clear understanding of what we aim to achieve, along with how and why. Only then should we decide whether to commit resources, be that money, people or might, toward an objective that is realistic and achievable.
Let's actually help people instead of throwing lives, bombs and money at the problem hoping it will go away.
Wednesday, August 28, 2013
Tuesday, December 18, 2012
Where was the village in Newtown, Connecticut?
We experienced a national tragedy last week in Newtown, Connecticut. This is not the first such incident, and it may not be the last. But nevertheless, we have all been shocked and horrified by the deadly and tragic attack on ones so innocent by a very troubled, evil young man. Thankfully, we are still not so jaded as a society that such an atrocious act still takes away our breath and rips at our hearts and souls as well it should. Also thankfully, that evil man has saved us all the pain of the media circus of a public trial by taking his own life immediately after he committed his heinous crime.
Now the inevitable cries for new laws to somehow prevent another such incident from occurring have begun. Hardly had the acrid smell of a recently fired gun begun to clear the hallways of the small school in Newtown before the press corps and politicians began the calls for new restrictions on guns. But where was the village?
Often in modern times we have been told by these same members of the press and these same liberal politicians the old axiom that, "It takes the village to raise a child." It has been used as the excuse for countless intrusions into the lives of good and decent people raising their children. We have all heard of the nightmare stories of CPS showing up and dragging children from their homes for the most inane or imbecilic reasons. The liberal politicians and so-called community leaders in our country have long sought the governance of the state into every aspect of our lives, especially into the realm of parenthood. They have already achieved it to levels that frighten many of us today.
So where were these government saviors when they had the chance to prevent the atrocities in Newtown? Why didn't they catch yet another latent psychopath lying wait in our midst? Where are their cries about the complicity of 'the village' in this crime? Surely, if the village is responsible for the behavior of its regular criminals, as we are so often reminded by our travesty of a judicial system, then aren't they even more so to blame for the creation of such an evil prodigy? Surely, those community leaders should be willing to sit in the seat of the accused and be held accountable for their inaction or ineptitude, right?
Of course, you will never hear a peep about such things from the media or the liberals at a time like this because the absurdity of such an argument would be plain. Yet, at any other time, they are ready to fire at will with the same absurd ammunition in their battle to further control our lives. No, now is the opportune time to fire their ridiculous anti-gun bullets, because now that wound is open and you are ripe targets for the attack.
Consider this, why do President Obama, Senator Feinstein, Senator Reid, Representative Pelosi and all of the other hard-core anti-gun advocating liberals in Washington, D.C. surround themselves and their children with heavily armed Secret Service security teams? Why don't they send their children or grandchildren, unprotected into the D.C. public school system, where, despite draconian gun restrictions, armed thugs walk the neighborhood streets and recruit at the playgrounds? I don't think they trust the village that surrounds them to raise their children or the gun laws that they championed, do you?
Now the inevitable cries for new laws to somehow prevent another such incident from occurring have begun. Hardly had the acrid smell of a recently fired gun begun to clear the hallways of the small school in Newtown before the press corps and politicians began the calls for new restrictions on guns. But where was the village?
Often in modern times we have been told by these same members of the press and these same liberal politicians the old axiom that, "It takes the village to raise a child." It has been used as the excuse for countless intrusions into the lives of good and decent people raising their children. We have all heard of the nightmare stories of CPS showing up and dragging children from their homes for the most inane or imbecilic reasons. The liberal politicians and so-called community leaders in our country have long sought the governance of the state into every aspect of our lives, especially into the realm of parenthood. They have already achieved it to levels that frighten many of us today.
So where were these government saviors when they had the chance to prevent the atrocities in Newtown? Why didn't they catch yet another latent psychopath lying wait in our midst? Where are their cries about the complicity of 'the village' in this crime? Surely, if the village is responsible for the behavior of its regular criminals, as we are so often reminded by our travesty of a judicial system, then aren't they even more so to blame for the creation of such an evil prodigy? Surely, those community leaders should be willing to sit in the seat of the accused and be held accountable for their inaction or ineptitude, right?
Of course, you will never hear a peep about such things from the media or the liberals at a time like this because the absurdity of such an argument would be plain. Yet, at any other time, they are ready to fire at will with the same absurd ammunition in their battle to further control our lives. No, now is the opportune time to fire their ridiculous anti-gun bullets, because now that wound is open and you are ripe targets for the attack.
Consider this, why do President Obama, Senator Feinstein, Senator Reid, Representative Pelosi and all of the other hard-core anti-gun advocating liberals in Washington, D.C. surround themselves and their children with heavily armed Secret Service security teams? Why don't they send their children or grandchildren, unprotected into the D.C. public school system, where, despite draconian gun restrictions, armed thugs walk the neighborhood streets and recruit at the playgrounds? I don't think they trust the village that surrounds them to raise their children or the gun laws that they championed, do you?
Monday, November 26, 2012
False Teachers
There are many false teachers in our lives today. The TV is full of people who will tell you almost anything to convince you to buy something, whether it’s an idea or a product. We are routinely barraged with pronouncements and theories about what the future holds in store for us and where we will end up. There are entire industries built around predicting the future, such as the stock market, investing and insurance. There are preachers throughout the land pronouncing that the end is nigh because they’ve seen the signs. There are politicians pronouncing the end of the world if we don’t change our industries, technologies and lifestyles to suit the latest fad or theory. There are proponents of the supposed impending Mayan apocalypse or the writings of Nostradamus claiming to have new interpretations of things written long ago.
When I hear such things, I am reminded of the history lessons about people in Europe when the year 1,000AD was approaching. Many of them were convinced then that Jesus was due to return because the ‘millennium’ had passed, and the time had come. Now, more than a 1,000 years later, we hear many of the same pronouncements yet again. The obsession with fortune telling and mysticism that consumes some has become the cynical plot of many movies and TV shows.
Jesus warned of such false teachers and their predictions in Matthew:
Matthew 16 (ESV)
1And the Pharisees and Sadducees came, and to test him they asked him to show them a sign from heaven. 2He answered them, “When it is evening, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red.’ 3And in the morning, ‘It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times. 4An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of Jonah.” So he left them and departed. 5When the disciples reached the other side, they had forgotten to bring any bread. 6Jesus said to them, “Watch and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” 7And they began discussing it among themselves, saying, “We brought no bread.” 8But Jesus, aware of this, said, “O you of little faith, why are you discussing among yourselves the fact that you have no bread? 9Do you not yet perceive? Do you not remember the five loaves for the five thousand, and how many baskets you gathered? 10Or the seven loaves for the four thousand, and how many baskets you gathered? 11How is it that you fail to understand that I did not speak about bread? Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” 12Then they understood that he did not tell them to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.
What do you believe? The world will end, there is no doubt, but when it will happen and how are very much so. Jesus said that we will not know until the time comes. And, though there are descriptions in the Bible of some of what will happen, I’m sure that words on paper can never fully capture what it will be like.
Jesus did not teach that we should obsess about the timing and nature of His return. He taught us what we are to do while we are here on Earth. He told us to love God above all, but also each other. He told us to put our faith and trust in Him. His commission and our mission is to spread His Gospel, the life, love, death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ to the ends of the Earth, baptizing and making disciples of men. We are to be His people for His purpose.
In God We Trust
When I hear such things, I am reminded of the history lessons about people in Europe when the year 1,000AD was approaching. Many of them were convinced then that Jesus was due to return because the ‘millennium’ had passed, and the time had come. Now, more than a 1,000 years later, we hear many of the same pronouncements yet again. The obsession with fortune telling and mysticism that consumes some has become the cynical plot of many movies and TV shows.
Jesus warned of such false teachers and their predictions in Matthew:
Matthew 16 (ESV)
1And the Pharisees and Sadducees came, and to test him they asked him to show them a sign from heaven. 2He answered them, “When it is evening, you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red.’ 3And in the morning, ‘It will be stormy today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky, but you cannot interpret the signs of the times. 4An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of Jonah.” So he left them and departed. 5When the disciples reached the other side, they had forgotten to bring any bread. 6Jesus said to them, “Watch and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” 7And they began discussing it among themselves, saying, “We brought no bread.” 8But Jesus, aware of this, said, “O you of little faith, why are you discussing among yourselves the fact that you have no bread? 9Do you not yet perceive? Do you not remember the five loaves for the five thousand, and how many baskets you gathered? 10Or the seven loaves for the four thousand, and how many baskets you gathered? 11How is it that you fail to understand that I did not speak about bread? Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.” 12Then they understood that he did not tell them to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees.
What do you believe? The world will end, there is no doubt, but when it will happen and how are very much so. Jesus said that we will not know until the time comes. And, though there are descriptions in the Bible of some of what will happen, I’m sure that words on paper can never fully capture what it will be like.
Jesus did not teach that we should obsess about the timing and nature of His return. He taught us what we are to do while we are here on Earth. He told us to love God above all, but also each other. He told us to put our faith and trust in Him. His commission and our mission is to spread His Gospel, the life, love, death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ to the ends of the Earth, baptizing and making disciples of men. We are to be His people for His purpose.
In God We Trust
Thursday, August 23, 2012
Biblical Government
The Bible has several sections that refer to government and governors. One of the most succinct is probably Romans 13.
Romans 13 not only admonishes us to submit to the governing authorities appointed by God, but it also tells us the purpose of those authorities. That purpose is to act in His stead in the affairs of men and enforce His commandments on Earth. The implication of this is obvious, we should be able to recognize a Godly government by the actions of our governors. Likewise, a properly administered Godly government should recognize and protect Godly citizens and punish the wicked.
If we find that our government praises and rewards the wicked and condemns the good, then that government is no longer acting with the authority of God and must be removed and replaced accordingly. This is what our founders saw in the government of the British king, and why they removed him (and all other men) from authority over their new country, the United States. Seeking Godly wisdom, they placed men into authority over themselves as individuals and bid them to submit themselves to no other authority except their fellow citizens and most of all to God Himself. This is why our presidents, representatives and citizens do not traditionally bow to foreign sovereigns, we do not recognize their sovereignty over us.
The founders understood that men must govern themselves if they are to live with freedom, and that men could only govern themselves through faith and reliance on God’s wisdom.
We should expect no less of our government, ourselves and our fellow citizens today.
Romans 13
Be Subject to Government
1Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. 2Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. 3For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; 4for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil. 5Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience’ sake. 6For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. 7Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.
8Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. 9For this, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” 10Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.
11Do this, knowing the time, that it is already the hour for you to awaken from sleep; for now salvation is nearer to us than when we believed. 12The night is almost gone, and the day is near. Therefore let us lay aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. 13Let us behave properly as in the day, not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual promiscuity and sensuality, not in strife and jealousy. 14But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh in regard to its lusts.
Romans 13 not only admonishes us to submit to the governing authorities appointed by God, but it also tells us the purpose of those authorities. That purpose is to act in His stead in the affairs of men and enforce His commandments on Earth. The implication of this is obvious, we should be able to recognize a Godly government by the actions of our governors. Likewise, a properly administered Godly government should recognize and protect Godly citizens and punish the wicked.
If we find that our government praises and rewards the wicked and condemns the good, then that government is no longer acting with the authority of God and must be removed and replaced accordingly. This is what our founders saw in the government of the British king, and why they removed him (and all other men) from authority over their new country, the United States. Seeking Godly wisdom, they placed men into authority over themselves as individuals and bid them to submit themselves to no other authority except their fellow citizens and most of all to God Himself. This is why our presidents, representatives and citizens do not traditionally bow to foreign sovereigns, we do not recognize their sovereignty over us.
The founders understood that men must govern themselves if they are to live with freedom, and that men could only govern themselves through faith and reliance on God’s wisdom.
We should expect no less of our government, ourselves and our fellow citizens today.
Romans 13
Be Subject to Government
1Every person is to be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God. 2Therefore whoever resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who have opposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. 3For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; 4for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil. 5Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience’ sake. 6For because of this you also pay taxes, for rulers are servants of God, devoting themselves to this very thing. 7Render to all what is due them: tax to whom tax is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor.
8Owe nothing to anyone except to love one another; for he who loves his neighbor has fulfilled the law. 9For this, “You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not covet,” and if there is any other commandment, it is summed up in this saying, “You shall love your neighbor as yourself.” 10Love does no wrong to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.
11Do this, knowing the time, that it is already the hour for you to awaken from sleep; for now salvation is nearer to us than when we believed. 12The night is almost gone, and the day is near. Therefore let us lay aside the deeds of darkness and put on the armor of light. 13Let us behave properly as in the day, not in carousing and drunkenness, not in sexual promiscuity and sensuality, not in strife and jealousy. 14But put on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make no provision for the flesh in regard to its lusts.
Monday, August 13, 2012
Seeds of a republic
More than 1,000 years before Plato, Moses was given the seeds of a republican form of government by his father-in-law Jethro.
Exodus 18 (NASB)
13It came about the next day that Moses sat to judge the people, and the people stood about Moses from the morning until the evening. 14Now when Moses’ father-in-law saw all that he was doing for the people, he said, “What is this thing that you are doing for the people? Why do you alone sit as judge and all the people stand about you from morning until evening?” 15Moses said to his father-in-law, “Because the people come to me to inquire of God. 16“When they have a dispute, it comes to me, and I judge between a man and his neighbor and make known the statutes of God and His laws.”
17Moses’ father-in-law (Jethro) said to him, “The thing that you are doing is not good. 18“You will surely wear out, both yourself and these people who are with you, for the task is too heavy for you; you cannot do it alone. 19“Now listen to me: I will give you counsel, and God be with you. You be the people’s representative before God, and you bring the disputes to God, 20then teach them the statutes and the laws, and make known to them the way in which they are to walk and the work they are to do. 21“Furthermore, you shall select out of all the people able men who fear God, men of truth, those who hate dishonest gain; and you shall place these over them as leaders of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties and of tens. 22“Let them judge the people at all times; and let it be that every major dispute they will bring to you, but every minor dispute they themselves will judge. So it will be easier for you, and they will bear the burden with you. 23“If you do this thing and God so commands you, then you will be able to endure, and all these people also will go to their place in peace.”
24So Moses listened to his father-in-law and did all that he had said. 25Moses chose able men out of all Israel and made them heads over the people, leaders of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties and of tens. 26They judged the people at all times; the difficult dispute they would bring to Moses, but every minor dispute they themselves would judge. 27Then Moses bade his father-in-law farewell, and he went his way into his own land.
Exodus 18 (NASB)
13It came about the next day that Moses sat to judge the people, and the people stood about Moses from the morning until the evening. 14Now when Moses’ father-in-law saw all that he was doing for the people, he said, “What is this thing that you are doing for the people? Why do you alone sit as judge and all the people stand about you from morning until evening?” 15Moses said to his father-in-law, “Because the people come to me to inquire of God. 16“When they have a dispute, it comes to me, and I judge between a man and his neighbor and make known the statutes of God and His laws.”
17Moses’ father-in-law (Jethro) said to him, “The thing that you are doing is not good. 18“You will surely wear out, both yourself and these people who are with you, for the task is too heavy for you; you cannot do it alone. 19“Now listen to me: I will give you counsel, and God be with you. You be the people’s representative before God, and you bring the disputes to God, 20then teach them the statutes and the laws, and make known to them the way in which they are to walk and the work they are to do. 21“Furthermore, you shall select out of all the people able men who fear God, men of truth, those who hate dishonest gain; and you shall place these over them as leaders of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties and of tens. 22“Let them judge the people at all times; and let it be that every major dispute they will bring to you, but every minor dispute they themselves will judge. So it will be easier for you, and they will bear the burden with you. 23“If you do this thing and God so commands you, then you will be able to endure, and all these people also will go to their place in peace.”
24So Moses listened to his father-in-law and did all that he had said. 25Moses chose able men out of all Israel and made them heads over the people, leaders of thousands, of hundreds, of fifties and of tens. 26They judged the people at all times; the difficult dispute they would bring to Moses, but every minor dispute they themselves would judge. 27Then Moses bade his father-in-law farewell, and he went his way into his own land.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
We Are A Republic, Not A Democracy
In honor of James Madison’s birthday, I thought that I’d share something very important that he wrote.
This is a topic that is still very pertinent today, and deserves discussion in light of the continual bombardment of misinformation from our media, government and elected officials.
It seems like a silly semantic argument to many, but the distinction between a republic and a democracy is profound.
Madison, Jay and Hamilton all went to great lengths to make their case for our republican form of government and the need for a new constitution to both empower and restrict it. They wrote what we now call the Federalist Papers in order to make their case and sell their ideas to the American public.
Here are some excerpts (in Italics) from Federalist #10 where Madison explains why America’s government needed to be established as a Republic and not as a Democracy. In fact, Madison argued that we must be a Republic of Republics (see Article IV Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution).
BTW: The Federalist Papers are readily available for anyone who is interested in reading more, and I highly recommend that you do.
Enjoy!
The Same Subject Continued
(The Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection)
From the New York Packet.
Friday, November 23, 1787.
MADISON
To the People of the State of New York:
AMONG the numerous advantages promised by a well constructed Union, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction...
...By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community...
...The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man; and we see them everywhere brought into different degrees of activity, according to the different circumstances of civil society...
...It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm...
The inference to which we are brought is, that the CAUSES of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its EFFECTS.
...From this view of the subject it may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert result from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions.
A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy, and we shall comprehend both the nature of the cure and the efficacy which it must derive from the Union.
The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended.
The effect of the first difference is, on the one hand, to refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations. Under such a regulation, it may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the purpose. On the other hand, the effect may be inverted. Men of factious tempers, of local prejudices, or of sinister designs, may, by intrigue, by corruption, or by other means, first obtain the suffrages, and then betray the interests, of the people...
...The other point of difference is, the greater number of citizens and extent of territory which may be brought within the compass of republican than of democratic government; and it is this circumstance principally which renders factious combinations less to be dreaded in the former than in the latter. The smaller the society, the fewer probably will be the distinct parties and interests composing it; the fewer the distinct parties and interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same party; and the smaller the number of individuals composing a majority, and the smaller the compass within which they are placed, the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of oppression. Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens; or if such a common motive exists, it will be more difficult for all who feel it to discover their own strength, and to act in unison with each other. Besides other impediments, it may be remarked that, where there is a consciousness of unjust or dishonorable purposes, communication is always checked by distrust in proportion to the number whose concurrence is necessary...
...The influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States. A religious sect may degenerate into a political faction in a part of the Confederacy; but the variety of sects dispersed over the entire face of it must secure the national councils against any danger from that source. A rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal division of property, or for any other improper or wicked project, will be less apt to pervade the whole body of the Union than a particular member of it; in the same proportion as such a malady is more likely to taint a particular county or district, than an entire State.
In the extent and proper structure of the Union, therefore, we behold a republican remedy for the diseases most incident to republican government. And according to the degree of pleasure and pride we feel in being republicans, ought to be our zeal in cherishing the spirit and supporting the character of Federalists.
PUBLIUS.
This is a topic that is still very pertinent today, and deserves discussion in light of the continual bombardment of misinformation from our media, government and elected officials.
It seems like a silly semantic argument to many, but the distinction between a republic and a democracy is profound.
Madison, Jay and Hamilton all went to great lengths to make their case for our republican form of government and the need for a new constitution to both empower and restrict it. They wrote what we now call the Federalist Papers in order to make their case and sell their ideas to the American public.
Here are some excerpts (in Italics) from Federalist #10 where Madison explains why America’s government needed to be established as a Republic and not as a Democracy. In fact, Madison argued that we must be a Republic of Republics (see Article IV Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution).
BTW: The Federalist Papers are readily available for anyone who is interested in reading more, and I highly recommend that you do.
Enjoy!
The Same Subject Continued
(The Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection)
From the New York Packet.
Friday, November 23, 1787.
MADISON
To the People of the State of New York:
AMONG the numerous advantages promised by a well constructed Union, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction...
...By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community...
...The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man; and we see them everywhere brought into different degrees of activity, according to the different circumstances of civil society...
...It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm...
The inference to which we are brought is, that the CAUSES of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its EFFECTS.
...From this view of the subject it may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert result from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would, at the same time, be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions.
A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking. Let us examine the points in which it varies from pure democracy, and we shall comprehend both the nature of the cure and the efficacy which it must derive from the Union.
The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended.
The effect of the first difference is, on the one hand, to refine and enlarge the public views, by passing them through the medium of a chosen body of citizens, whose wisdom may best discern the true interest of their country, and whose patriotism and love of justice will be least likely to sacrifice it to temporary or partial considerations. Under such a regulation, it may well happen that the public voice, pronounced by the representatives of the people, will be more consonant to the public good than if pronounced by the people themselves, convened for the purpose. On the other hand, the effect may be inverted. Men of factious tempers, of local prejudices, or of sinister designs, may, by intrigue, by corruption, or by other means, first obtain the suffrages, and then betray the interests, of the people...
...The other point of difference is, the greater number of citizens and extent of territory which may be brought within the compass of republican than of democratic government; and it is this circumstance principally which renders factious combinations less to be dreaded in the former than in the latter. The smaller the society, the fewer probably will be the distinct parties and interests composing it; the fewer the distinct parties and interests, the more frequently will a majority be found of the same party; and the smaller the number of individuals composing a majority, and the smaller the compass within which they are placed, the more easily will they concert and execute their plans of oppression. Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens; or if such a common motive exists, it will be more difficult for all who feel it to discover their own strength, and to act in unison with each other. Besides other impediments, it may be remarked that, where there is a consciousness of unjust or dishonorable purposes, communication is always checked by distrust in proportion to the number whose concurrence is necessary...
...The influence of factious leaders may kindle a flame within their particular States, but will be unable to spread a general conflagration through the other States. A religious sect may degenerate into a political faction in a part of the Confederacy; but the variety of sects dispersed over the entire face of it must secure the national councils against any danger from that source. A rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal division of property, or for any other improper or wicked project, will be less apt to pervade the whole body of the Union than a particular member of it; in the same proportion as such a malady is more likely to taint a particular county or district, than an entire State.
In the extent and proper structure of the Union, therefore, we behold a republican remedy for the diseases most incident to republican government. And according to the degree of pleasure and pride we feel in being republicans, ought to be our zeal in cherishing the spirit and supporting the character of Federalists.
PUBLIUS.
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
Seeking Excellence, Truth & Honor
8Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right,whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, dwell on these things. 9The things you have learned and received and heard and seen in me, practice these things,and the God of peace will be with you. (Philippians 4:8-9 NASB)
I'm honestly not sure that I can add anything to this, but I had to post it because it is so profound.
Prayers & Blessings!
I'm honestly not sure that I can add anything to this, but I had to post it because it is so profound.
Prayers & Blessings!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)