Es ist kein Schwert das schärfer schiert,
Als wenn ein Baur zum Herren wird.
(There is no sword that cuts sharper,
Than if a peasant becomes master.)
– Hans Jakob Christoffel von Grimmelshausen, Simplicissimus
This past month, we marked Presidents' Day, and it was also the bicentenary of the birth of the “log cabin President.” The newly inaugurated POTUS is struggling to compare himself to Abraham Lincoln.
The myth of Lincoln as the “Great Emancipator” lives on in spite of the efforts of Professor DiLorenzo through The Real Lincoln and Lincoln Unmasked. The war was not about slavery initially. It was about the right to secede.
Now, let's leave the argument over why the South seceded, and let's assume that it was due to the slavery institution being threatened by the North and the federal government, e.g., through the weakening of the institution a ban on slavery in new territories would give. Let's also suppose that Lincoln did have an agenda of abolishing slavery, but he could not openly be an outright abolitionist due to the risks that would give to his political career. Let's also presume that the Emancipation Proclamation, which did not apply to territories under Union jurisdiction, not only was strategically designed to avoid intervention by the British Empire, but also strategically designed for domestic purposes – to abolish slavery whilst not provoking those in the North who opposed abolition. If we make these assumptions, slavery was abolished as a result of the war. We don't even have to make these assumptions. Slavery was abolished nonetheless.
With or without these assumptions, however, there still is a major problem, to say the least. These facts remain:
- The rest of the West ended slavery peacefully.
- Lincoln violated the U.S. Constitution big time.
- The right for the States to secede was in effect abolished, removing an effective check on the federal government.
- The more aristocratically oriented Southern culture was demolished.
- The more decentralized system was replaced by a central state run from Washington, D.C.
- A behemoth to run around the world “making it safe for democracy” was created.
- Life, liberty, and property were destroyed.
Across the Big Pond, Peter Tatchell praised the inauguration of the first black POTUS. He says about his own country:
If [Britons enthusiastic about the inauguration] were consistent they would join the call for a democratically elected and accountable head of state, open to British people of all races, classes and faiths or beliefs.Oh yes, everyone's right to be our Overlord; that concept that has given us so much progress.
What about caring for liberty instead of the right to rise to the top irrespective of class, race, gender, or whatever classification you can think of?
The “login cabin President” grew up to be a tyrant. Napoleon came with his ambitions and put Europe through hell, not to speak of a mere corporal from Austria with a moustache. Obama has a Civil Rights agenda, where combating employment discrimination is central. Is Obama a group representative using his power to tell everyone else how they shall treat his kind? Never mind property rights?
Peter Tatchell also says:
The current monarchical system of determining our head of state is premised on the assumption that the most ignorant, stupid, immoral white Windsor first-born is more entitled to be our head of state than the best-informed, wisest and most moral black or Asian Briton.The democratically elected politicians are well-informed, wise, and moral? And a democratically elected head of state will be? Of course! And pigs will fly!
Plato told us:
No one ever teaches well who wants to teach, or governs well who wants to govern.What now is the case is that we get a contest between those who have the highest ambitions of governing.
On that Tuesday back in November, Americans had the choice between McCain and Obama. Isn't it great that you get to choose your own Overlord?
A “stimulus” package has just passed through Congress. The concept is tantamount to my refurbishing my bathroom if I get laid off to get my personal economy going. Wisdom amongst those who are elected by the masses?
Fact is that interest rates should be set up, not down. However, most people are in debt, and they don't like interest rates going up. The politicos are taking care of their reelection, and they prefer injection of more alcohol to accepting the hard hangover. Allowing the hard medicine of liquidation of debt would make the masses of debtors upset. The politicos who want their votes would not risk that.
It was about the same in Versailles 90 years ago. There had been a war between peoples, and the people, who had suffered the war, wanted “someone” to pay. The politicos gave the people what they wanted good and hard. So there could be no peaceful peace, as the aristocrats had arranged about a century earlier.
That's the concept of modern democracy in a nutshell. Isn't it grand?
The democratic century has given us lots of intervention, domestic and foreign. The politicos interfere in our lives, homes, and businesses to an unprecedented level. The economy is managed, which gives us booms and busts. The omnipotent democratic government seems to have no limits.
But I guess that's OK when anyone, of whatever class, race, gender, etc., born in a log cabin or a mansion, can grow up to be President.
Originally published at the Intellectual Conservative.