| Friday,
September 17, 2010
Constitution Day
Self Government
Mail has an
interesting letter from my friend and sometime collaborator Mike Flynn
on the way things have changed in precinct politics, and it's worth taking
the time to go read it. Precinct politics has changed a lot from the days of
Heinlein's "Take Back Your Government" and even from the time in 1962 when I
was able to go from novice to county chairman in a couple of years through
heavy duty precinct work. It didn't hurt that I was able to write pretty
good speeches. In those days America was pretty well governed by about
50,000 self-selected local precinct workers. Oh, sure, it wasn't direct
government, but then how could it be? But the Goldwater movement, and later
Reagan, both had their roots in precinct work: by conservative efforts in
the precincts, either by becoming precinct workers themselves, or by
campaigning among them for conservative ideas, being persuasive not
confrontational, and by conforming to party discipline, which is to say, if
we lost in the primary, we didn't walk off in a huff and denounce the
winning candidate.
Reagan's notion of the Big Tent included not speaking ill of fellow
Republicans. That didn't stop him from being an effective political
conservative, although sometimes he had to make compromises -- particularly
in California -- in order to govern. I didn't much care for campaigning for
some of the Country Club Republicans, but that came with the job in those
days, and when I later became a political professional I adhered to the
rules. In those days you could be a principled but successful political
professional. My late friend Lyn Nofziger proved that.
Much has changed since that time, but not everywhere. Precinct work has
changed, and it's sometimes harder to rise in the party hierarchy, but it's
still possible.
Which brings us to an elementary point that is often overlooked: in order
to have self government, it is necessary to have citizens who are willing to
govern. You can't leave government to professionals without closer
supervision or it's not self government any longer. Many of those who
complain the loudest about the government they get have done little if
anything about it. Some haven't bothered to vote. Far fewer have seen to it
that someone else votes. Few have given money to candidates of their choice,
few have attended rallies for their candidates. Many have blogged with
varying degrees of effectiveness, but blogging is not enough. Some have
supported journals and blogs that express views they agree with or at least
think ought to be aired, and that's admirable -- this place couldn't stay
open without subscribers -- but that's not really enough in critical times.
If you want self government you have to be willing to participate in
politics. You have have no interest in politics, but that emphatically does
not insure that politics has no interest in you; you ignore it at your
peril. I understand that many have no time to devote to precinct work and
taking back their government; they have to find some other way to
participate in self government. For some that will be financial. For others
it will take the part of encouraging others to participate, possibly of
enabling others to participate. When I was a youngster the city of Memphis
was pretty well governed by a city boss who held no political office, and a
number of city commissions mostly filled by unpaid housewives. I understand
that "housewife" is no longer thought a respectable appellation in some
circles. Is "homemaker" better? In those times much of the middle class
understood that if you want self government you have to be willing to
participate in government, else you'll get governed by someone else -- and
after a while you may not be allowed to participate.
Self government is much declined in these United States, but it is not
gone, and it is not impossible. There are fewer home makers (of either sex)
than in those times. Families often need two incomes in order to survive in
the brave new world of government enforcement of sexual equality,
disabilities acts, regulations, rules, inspections, supervisors of
inspections, inspector generals, enforcement officers, rules, and the taxes
to pay for all that structure. Note also that the structure is not going to
go away by itself. It took a long time to assemble, and disassembly will
take a while also -- assuming that we want it disassembled. Note also that
if you want a lot of government, it becomes a lot harder for it to be self
government. Hiram Johnson thought to reform California city governments by
restructuring them to take much of the power of government from elected
politicians and hand it out to commissions and commissioners. That worked
for a while, but over time the city councils became full time paid
positions, the city commissions became more structured with large paid
staffs and became political perks rather than citizen supervisory boards --
after all, the city had so much to do, don't we need continuity and full
time councils to supervise all this? And so forth. The notion that a
group of citizens could supervise full time city employees -- the original
argument for civil service, after all -- faded out. Perhaps it is time to
reexamine that notion.
This ramble has gone on long enough. My point is simple. If you want to
take back your government, you must understand that you have to be prepared
to participate. Self government requires that the governed be willing to
take their turns governing. George Washington always considered himself
first and foremost a Virginia gentleman planter, second a soldier, and only
then a politician. When I was young we learned early in school to admire
Cincinatus. I suspect most of our children have no idea who that was.
Perhaps they can find out on line; they sure won't learn it from their
civics texts.
Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.
==========================
I wasn't in the professional political management game long enough to
call it a career. At the time I could have done that I had my doubts about
my ability to do political management without compromising principles, and
came to the conclusion that while it was possible -- Lyn Nofziger being a
prime example -- it was difficult; and my talents would be better employed
in other ways. At one point I was ready to sell my house and move to
Washington; I'm glad I didn't.
=================
I have lost most of my respect for Karl Rove and Charles Krauthammer
since the O'Donnell victory. Perhaps I misunderstand. I had actually thought
Krauthammer a bit more than just a haughty neoconservative hoping to be
adopted into the ruling class. Rove is a hired gun and a very good one, and
his statements about O'Donnell were very grave errors possibly prompted by
some pressure from the ruling country club party leaders; I hadn't expected
Rove to believe differently, but I was surprised that he said it after the
primary results. It shows he has less political judgment than I thought,
because his going on record that way is going to cost him. Krauthammer I had
expected better from. Ah well.
=================
My son Richard works for Congressman
Rohrabacher and has asked me to post this. Dana had long been a friend, and
I have always supported him for Congress although I do not live in his
district. He supports the concepts of X Projects and Prizes as a way to
encourage technological progress without building large government
structures. I do not often post political appeals.
Dana Rohrabacher is a
top Republican on the House Science Committee. He is a rare politician who
is interested in science and technology for what it can do for our
country, not just his district or re-election prospects. He is seen by
many in Congress as an expert in aerospace and technology, yet Dana is the
first to admit he knows what he doesn't know. Having someone like Dana in
a position of leadership could be the most important step for commercial
space, NASA, and the exploration of our solar system.
Dana is working hard to
move up in the House leadership and needs your support. Help send a
message to Washington that we need freedom, science and technology to get
our economy on track. Dana's campaign committee has created a website
www.techpatriots.com to get the word out to people interested in
science and technology. Dana is building a campaign war chest to support
candidates who share his vision of commercial space. Please visit the
website or go directly to the contribution page:
http://techpatriots.ning.com/page/donate-1
=================
IGNORE THE FOLLOWING: IT IS NO LONGER A PROBLEM:
I sent this email to my advisors group today, and Bob Thompson replied
Post this on your View page
today. I'll bet you'll get all sorts of help. If you ask for them, I'll
bet lots of your readers will send you electronic copies.
So I will:
Mote in God's Eye
It is not in Kindle and Niven and I own the rights,
so I want to get it put up in Amazon and iTunes.
I don't have a good electronic copy of course, and
actually I don't know much about formatting for those editions although I
don't expect big problems finding out.
Advice, help, anything else appreciated. I suspect
this may sell a couple of thousand copies. Perhaps more. We can then go on
to Gripping Hand or Mote Around Murcheson's Eye... Help?
Jerry Pournelle
Chaos Manor
THANKS to all who responded. We now have good copies. Thanks again.
===========================
Constitution Day
There was a time when every public school in the nation, including those
of the Old South where the Civil War was still remembered as the Lost Cause,
taught that the Constitution of the United States was unique, the beginning
of a new era, a government created after a revolution but without the great
bloodshed and turmoil that usually accompanies such events. England had
experience the Civil War and the the Year They Killed the King. There had
been the Commonwealth that abolished Christmas. Then came the Glorious
Revolution. A hundred years later came the Constitution of the United States
of America.
We learned that in civics classes, and in elementary political science
classes in high school, and in most political science classes in
universities. That is no longer fashionable in academia, where they are more
likely to point to the imperfections of the Constitution, and denounce the
notion of American exceptionalism, and students are more likely to be
assigned books by one or another unknown modern deconstructing the
Constitution than any part of de Tocqueville.
Part of the English tradition was regularization of the courts, and
establishment of ministerial responsibility to Parliament. The King could
not hold court in the Star Chamber, a court unknown to the law; and from the
time of King William, a minister holding the confidence of Parliament
proposed and administered the laws. The King had his prerogatives and many
continued in England well after that hot summer of 1787 when the
Constitution was written and approved in an assembly not often matched in
the history of the world. When Franklin was asked what had they decided --
"What have you given us, monarchy or a republic?" Dr. Franklin replied "A
republic, madam. If you can keep it."
We kept it for about two hundred years. We can still restore it.
===============
And on Constitution Day the President has appointed a Czar, a position
unknown to the law, as a Great Officer of State who will hold Star Chamber
power over much of the finance of America.
This is not a move in the direction of a Republic. Officers of the
United States require the approval of the Senate. Congress may allow the
President to delegate appointment of inferior officers, but this is not such
a case. Congress has not created the position of Czar of finances. President
Obama acted purportedly because his control of Congress and the Senate is
not large enough to prevent the Republican minority from blocking the
appointment of Elizabeth Warren as head of the Financial Protection Agency,
and instead has by Presidential edict created the post of Czar to be held by
a personal advisor exempt from senatorial confirmation.
Friday TOP
Current Mail
|
