Ronald Reagan once said that the nine scariest words in the English language are “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.” In thus opining, he was simply reflecting an American tradition that began with the Founding Fathers: a healthy suspicion of government.

And, now, despite rampant government dependency, it seems that this tradition lives on. A CNN/Opinion Research Corporation survey shows that 56 percent of Americans consider the federal government an “immediate” threat to their rights. Not surprisingly, however, where citizens come down on the question is influenced by political affiliation. Writes CNN’s Paul Steinhauser, “only 37 percent of Democrats, 63 percent of Independents and nearly 7 in 10 Republicans say the federal government poses a threat to the rights of Americans.”

To put the poll in perspective, there are a few things we should note. Since CNN is a liberal news organization, there is every reason to believe that 56 percent may be a low-end number on American suspicion of Uncle Sam. It’s also notable that the percentages of Independents and Republicans who consider government a threat are extremely close, while the former are separated from the Democrats by a whopping 26 points. This indicates that Democrats are out of step with the mainstream on this issue. Moreover, since elections are swung by Independents, the fact that they side with Republicans bodes well for the party this November. After all, the GOP is currently perceived as the best bet for putting a brake on the socialist tide sweeping Washington.

Yet we should also take note of the word “immediate.” Whatever was meant by it exactly in the poll, such research is, to an extent, just a snapshot of the mood at the moment. This is especially true among Independents, called “swing” voters because, highly influenced by emotional factors, they’re the pendulum of American politics.

The problem here is that while the socialist proposals currently emanating from Congress are raising hackles, the federal government has long been exceeding the bounds established for it by the Constitution. And if we’re really serious about protecting our rights, the only solution is to understand our founding document and support only those politicians who will adhere to it. Unfortunately, as a recent study has shown, many Americans not only don’t understand the Constitution, they believe it’s “obsolete.”

Yet, there is a problem with understanding the Constitution: Many don’t want to. They would rather just dismiss it as obsolete because it forestalls the kind of government action that could create, by their lights, a better world. This is the statist mentality quite common today. But is the government, as a student once said to me, “there to make people happy”? Or is there good reason to be suspicious of it?

Unless we’re anarchists, we realize that government is a necessary evil. But big government is an even greater unnecessary evil. Note that, generally speaking, the most infamous crimes throughout history — the Holocaust, the communist extermination of 100 million people during the 20th century, etc. — have been perpetrated by large, intrusive governments. So while some say it takes a big government to solve big problems, I say it takes a big government to commit big crimes.

In fact, big crimes are almost inevitable when a state achieves absolute power, which, as Lord Acton said, “corrupts absolutely.” This is why man has sometimes sought to establish a balance of power in a nation. As an example, the ancient Spartans had two kings. As another, the 18th-century Americans created three co-equal branches of government — the executive, legislative and judicial — and a balance of power between the central government and the states. It’s a model that remains in force as long as we adhere to that obsolete document, the Constitution.

Unfortunately, because Americans lack the necessary suspicion of government (the CNN poll results notwithstanding), we are gravitating toward something that, sadly, is never rendered obsolete: tyranny. Many will dispute this, as they call our movement toward absolute governmental power “progress.” Yet, it’s not a matter of opinion, as there is a way freedom can be measured.

A government enacts laws, and a law by definition is the removal of a freedom because it states that there is something you must or mustn’t do (this is why government is often called a necessary evil). Thus, the barometer of freedom is simple:

The more laws we have, the less free we are from state intrusion.

Now, consider that we continually enact more laws but hardly ever rescind any. What does this mean?

Every year we are less and less free.

This is a phenomenon that transcends president, party and policy. Call our government what you will — unconstitutional, socialist-leaning, progressive — the fact is that, as sand through an hourglass, our freedoms are being erased. It is a civilizational death by a thousand cuts.

And, take this process to its logical conclusion, and you end up in a very dark place: absolute governmental power.

How can this be avoided? As for the federal government, the solution is adherence to that “obsolete” document once taught in anachronisms known as civics classes. On the state level, one solution is the Defense against Tyranny Amendment, which would, as I wrote years ago:

place a constitutionally mandated cap on the number of laws that can be created.... This, of course, would require lawmakers to finally become law-takers, as they would have to strike legislation from the books until they reached the threshold imposed by the amendment.  [Then,] if they wanted to enact a new law they would have to rescind an old one.  This would ensure that the total amount of freedom (if not the type) we enjoyed would remain constant and at the level we deem necessary to remain a free people.

On a more basic level, we Americans need to cultivate a healthy suspicion of government. There are just too many among us who, while thoroughly suspicious of big business, believe that big government can “make people happy.” It’s an attitude that leads to a very unhappy place.

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (5)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Flu-Bird said:

Big goverment big threat The biggist threat we have today is a bigger more intrusive goverment lead by BIG BROTHER and the whole intention of the UN in the first place

February 27, 2010

Jim said:

... "The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground." --Thomas Jefferson

February 27, 2010

Jofas said:

... With Federal Revenue dropping and their inability to operate within a budget serious actions are needed by the people to control this beast over us. I think it's time the Air Force was dissolved and the Air Wing's put back under Army Divisions. With the savings we'd see axing alot of the upper echelon in the Air Force we'd have more money to hardware and people on the ground who do the actual work. Have you seen the reports that the Air Force is failing to properly handle it's nuclear mission at Minot AFB and at Kirtland AFB in New Mexico? www.airforcetimes.com/news/2010/02/airforce_nukes_audit_022710w/ We can not allow them to keep going on like this. We've got a Navy sailing ghost ships around the seas because we can't afford to properly man them. By getting the Air Wing's back under Army Divisions we could wake up the Pentagon that people are the primary weapon we have and to quit wasting money on less and less Hardware due to skyrocketing prices. We need to dissolve the Air Force as the first step in reining in the Beast that can not operate within a budget. Our Federal Government has bankrupted us. DOD played a big role in it. Look for the Youtube video of Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld testifying before Congress on the day before 9-11. He told Congress he lost $2 Trillion and didn't know where DOD put it. How did DOD even have $2 Trillion when their budget was only half a trillion annually? They were playing their money in the Wallstreet fiasco? You betcha. If the American people realized this I think they would be crashing planes into Wallstreet.

February 28, 2010

Cheryl said:

Our own worst enemy .. The first step is to stop being a country of 'victims' who want the government to move in and provide for us when the chips are down or tragedy befalls us or when we make a stupid decision. We need to get back to people being expected to pick themselves up by the bootstraps. Bad things happen and you move on. We make foolish choices and must pay the consequences. Personal responsibility has all but left society's mindset and that is at the root of our problem. The more people who are dependent on the government - whether it be for social security, disability checks, welfare, food stamps, etc - the easier it is for the government to march toward full control. Who has the guts to bite the hand that feeds them? Very few. Freedom begins and ends with personal responsibility .. in all areas of life.

March 01, 2010

gary.roxene said:

Rights: right? Entitlements: wrong? The very language we speak leads us to a place where right and wrong is a sourced logic via how we view truth. If we think it is all just opinion (dialectic) then we are in trouble. If we think truth itself is a "right" in terms of ownership we presume upon grace. Why? Inalienable rights assume that we at least believe in right and wrong and absolutes but today that is not true because the assumption now is that everyone's "truth" is their entitlement meaning that nothing is absolute and therefor even accounting is not a viable term. So. When government becomes an "us" that think that everything is (a) right and that nothing is wrong the laws themselves (constitution) are no long viable because accounting has no meaning if we give ourselves 100% grace. It just proves that it cannot ALL be good. If it is immorality itself is *good*. 100% narcissism is not what the founders had in mind. It is only when we realize (as our founders did) that freedom is a by product of accountability that we will see that Truth is something to obey, not to assume, narcissistically, that it is yours change. The elephant in the room is morality.

March 02, 2010 | url