Without liberty, life loses its luster, becoming an endless series of sunrises and sunsets where one’s actions are dictated by necessity, custom, or someone else.
Defenders of liberty and the members of the Ruling Class have very different views about society, freedom, and the appropriate role for government. The key moral basis for the progressive worldview might not be so much that they care about other people more but that they want to control the resources that society uses to take care of the needy. And their claims to intellectual superiority are not borne out by the facts, either. But these facts don’t dent progressive self-confidence. Their key challenge isn’t internal, but external: the barriers to their rule stated in the Constitution.
Our United States is vastly different from the nation our Founding Fathers created and from the ideal they intended America to be. A modern Ruling Class with a belief system not far from that of their tyrannical ancestors have infiltrated our country. Their progressive ideology clearly dominates our society. The constitutional separation of powers crafted so deliberately by our Founders has been replaced by independent commissions creating federal rules, a process totally lacking the original legislative processes’ safeguards.
The progressives have tried to convince us that the Constitution is no longer relevant or applicable in today’s world, having been authored by dead white men. As a result of rebranding themselves, the progressive Ruling Class also rebranded the country from one with self-government that was limited in its scope to one where an expert government required ever increasing amounts of power.
1908, as president of Princeton University, Wilson wrote, “Living political constitutions must be Darwinian. “Society is a living organism and must obey the laws of life, not of mechanics; it must develop. All that progressives ask or desire is permission—in an era when ‘development,’ ‘evolution,’ is the scientific word—to interpret the Constitution according to the Darwinian principle; all they ask is recognition of the fact that a nation is a living thing and not a machine.”
Old ideas such as “liberty” should be discarded when they were no longer useful to progressive thought—as should the basic arrangements of the Constitution, of which Wilson was no fan. Instead, he favored the British parliamentary system and was an opponent of the separation of powers. “I ask you to put this question to yourselves: Should we not draw the executive and legislature closer together? Should we not, on the one hand, give the individual leaders of opinion in Congress a better chance to have an intimate party in determining who should be president, and the president, on the other hand, a better chance to approve himself a statesman, and his advisers capable men of affairs, in the guidance of Congress?”
It was titled “The Reconstruction of the Southern States.” Wilson writes: An extraordinary and very perilous state of affairs had been created in the South by the sudden and absolute emancipation of the negroes [sic], and it was not strange that the southern legislatures should deem it necessary to take extraordinary steps to guard against the manifest and pressing dangers which it entailed. Here was a vast “laboring, landless, homeless class,” once slaves, now free; unpracticed in liberty, unschooled in self-control; never sobered by the discipline of self-support, never established in any habit of prudence; excited by a freedom they did not understand, exalted by false hopes; bewildered and without leaders, and yet insolent and aggressive; sick of work, covetous of pleasure—a host of dusky children untimely put out of school. . . . They were a danger to themselves as well as those whom they had once served.
In his first term, he pushed through rule changes that enforced racial segregation in the federal civil service, one of the few governmental avenues for advancement prior to his coming to office. The postmaster general established full segregation in his offices, with the Treasury and the Department of the Navy to follow. To make segregation in hiring easier, all applicants for jobs were required to submit a personal photo for the first time. After the House passed a bill making interracial marriage a felony in the District of Columbia, Wilson replied to a group of black leaders protesting the legislation, “The purpose of these measures was to reduce the friction. It is as far as possible from being a movement against the Negroes. I sincerely believe it to be in their interest
After winning reelection in 1916 with the campaign slogan “He kept us out of the war,” he entered World War I shortly after beginning his second term. Wilson then began a swift crackdown on his political foes in opposition to the war. He established the Committee on Public Information (CPI) to both conduct a pro-war propaganda effort and to censor any writings against it. The Sedition Act of 1918 extended the previous year’s Espionage Act to make it a crime—punishable by twenty years in prison—to speak or write against the government, the war, or the sale of bonds to finance the war. One of his opponents in the 1912 campaign, Socialist Eugene V. Debs, went to prison under the act.
But Wilson remains a hero of the Ruling Class progressive movement for his success at shifting power away from elected leaders and toward non elected decision makers. This was his way of dismantling one of the key obstacles the Constitution laid in the progressive’s path: that only Congress could legislate. In his first term, he initiated and signed four major bills: the Federal Reserve Act, which set up the Federal Reserve System; the Federal Trade Commission Act, which established the FTC; the Clayton Antitrust Act, which expanded the role of the Justice Department in approving mergers and acquisitions; and the Federal Farm Loan Act, which established the Federal Farm Loan Board and Federal Land Banks.
Wilson’s Attorney General and father of the infamous “Palmer Raids” and the “Red Scare”, Mitchell Palmer, a candidate for the Democratic nomination for president in 1920, called for a peacetime extension of the Sedition Act.
Wilson is also a hero among progressives for one more of his actions. He called a special session of Congress shortly after being sworn in to reinstitute the income tax, which had been abolished after the Civil War. The promise when introduced was that the rates would never be above 15 percent and would apply only to the rich. When first passed, the standard rate was 6 percent, and only 400,000 taxpayers paid taxes.8 By 1918, the top rate was 77 percent, and 4.4 million people paid income tax. Even after the end of the World War I, high taxes and a broad net of taxpayers were maintained.
Wilson epitomizes today’s ubiquitous progressive value, almost their raison d’être. Consider again their three core beliefs: ordinary people can’t manage their own affairs; government is the natural way to help them; and the morally (and intellectually) superior progressives are the natural ones to run the government to accomplish those tasks.
===Conspiracies of the Ruling Class: How to Break Their Grip Forever (Lindsey, Lawrence B.)
(Terrific new must read book by a power elite insider)
In 1913, a quintessential example of the Ruling Class’s beliefs and philosophy rose to the presidency: Woodrow Wilson. Wilson, whose ideas of a “Living Constitution” laid the groundwork for the death of classical liberalism, the current now completed impotence of the Constitution and the all but complete takeover of America by the progressive elitist fascism that is today the dominant intellectual ideology of both the Republican and Democratic parties to one degree of another.
Wilson epitomized today’s ubiquitous progressive values, almost their raison d’être. Consider again their three core beliefs: ordinary people can’t manage their own affairs; government is the natural way to help them; and the morally (and intellectually) superior progressives are the natural ones to run the government to accomplish those tasks.
This arrogant, cultural narcissism of innate superiority drives the ruling elites, on both sides of the political spectrum, towards achieving ever more concentrated power, whether it be in Washington, America’s corporate boardrooms, Universities and almost all the large bureaucratic monstrosities that now dominate every aspect of the lives of our formerly sovereign citizenry.
It provides the binding common themes that allow our nations current ruling elites to believe that they are above the law and that the the laws, as dictated by them of course, are for the common masses of humanity, designed to provide the framework from which not only can the elites continue to gain power and control over every aspect of people’s lives, but also over the wealth that of the entire nation.
They are the secular humanist heirs of Wilson, who along with the Fabian socialist “father” of modern American Education, John Dewey, set the incrementalist stage for the progressives attainment of their lofty status as the representatives of the collective interests of a dumbed down and ignorant proletariat. If the unfortunate and ignorant great unwashed cannot truly understand what it is their superiors are seeking to accomplish in their name, why then the ruling conspiracy of like minded elites requires an ever greater subjugation and the State enforced taking of more and more the freedom of action, will and thought that were once protected by the American Constitution.
In the social Darwinian processes that justify our national and transnational elites delusionally derived self-anointed rule; democracy has no standing and the Constitution no bearing on their goals for the nation, or for humankind. The desire of the progressives, Wilson’s wet dream, that it be a “living” document becomes about as Orwellian a concept as one can get, for in reality, to the power elites that now rule us, the Constitution is as dead as the founders that wrote it. Thus the fascist tyranny of the ends justifying the means in all things they touch, in all things that “we”, the people, cannot understand.
The following article is worth reading and the points should be well taken, but for the fact that the author seems to fall for the trap of semantics, the one that confuses “classical” liberalism with “progressive” liberalism, which, in reality are mutually exclusive concepts. And the fallacy that decries the true liberal, conservative belief in the absolute rule of law and equates those who wish to uphold the Constitution as its embodiment as “fascists.” The rising totalitarian dominance of progressivism is close to claiming a complete victory, the Leviathan will never give an inch. The people’s protests will be atomized into ineffective voices of revolt.
Authoritarianism is ascendant and with it anti-rational bigotry. History does not end. It eddies.
Liberalism is dead. Or at least it is on the ropes. Triumphant a quarter-century ago, when liberal democracy appeared to have prevailed definitively over the totalitarian utopias that exacted such a toll in blood, it is now under siege from without and within.
Nationalism and authoritarianism, reinforced by technology, have come together to exercise new forms of control and manipulation over human beings whose susceptibility to greed, prejudice, ignorance, domination, subservience and fear was not, after all, swept away by the fall of the Berlin Wall.
As Communism fell, and closed societies were forced open, and an age of rapid globalization dawned, and the United States earned the moniker of “hyperpower,” it seemed reasonable to believe, as Francis Fukuyama argued in 1989, that, “The triumph of the West, of the Western idea, is evident first of all in the total exhaustion of viable systematic alternatives to Western liberalism.” Therefore, per Fukuyama, the end point of history had been reached with “the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of human government.”
This was a rational argument. It made sense. Hundreds of millions of people enslaved within the Soviet imperium had just been freed. They knew — everyone knew — which system worked better. The problem is that the hold of reason in human affairs is always tenuous.