By Kevin D. Williamson
Friday, March 18, 2016
There is a line from John Adams of which conservatives,
particularly those of a moralistic bent, are fond: “Our Constitution was made
only for a moral and religious people.” The surrounding prose is quoted much
less frequently, and it is stern stuff dealing with one of Adams’s great fears
— one that is particularly relevant to this moment in our history.
John Adams hated democracy and he feared what was known
in the language of the time as “passion.” Adams’s famous assessment: “I do not
say that democracy has been more pernicious on the whole, and in the long run,
than monarchy or aristocracy. Democracy has never been and never can be so
durable as aristocracy or monarchy; but while it lasts, it is more bloody than
either.” Democracy, he wrote, “never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and
murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. It
is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, less
ambitious, or less avaricious than aristocracy or monarchy. It is not true, in
fact, and nowhere appears in history. Those passions are the same in all men,
under all forms of simple government, and when unchecked, produce the same
effects of fraud, violence, and cruelty.”
If you are wondering why that pedantic conservative
friend of yours corrects you every time you describe our form of government as
democracy — “It’s a republic!” he will insist — that is why. Your pedantic
conservative friend probably is supporting Ted Cruz. The democratic passions
that so terrified Adams have filled the sails of Donald Trump.
At some point within the past few decades (it is
difficult to identify the exact genesis) the rhetorical affectation of
politicians’ presuming to speak for “We the People” became fashionable. Three
words from the preamble to the Constitution came to stand in for a particular
point of view and a particular set of assumptions present in both of our major
national political tendencies. Molly Ivins, the shallow progressive polemicist,
liked to thunder that “We the People don’t have a lobbyist!” She liked to call
lobbyists “lobsters,” too, a half-joke that she, at least, never tired of. Dr.
Ben Carson likes to draft “We the People” into his service. Sean Hannity is
very fond of the phrase, and so-called conservative talk radio currently relies
heavily on the assumption that the phrase is intended to communicate: that there
exists on one side of a line a group of people called “Americans” and on the
other side a group called “the Establishment,” and that “We the People” are
getting screwed by “Them.”
I write “so-called” conservative talk radio because the
radio mob dropped conservatism with something like military parade-ground
precision the moment it looked like the ratings — and hence the juice — were on
the other side. Donald Trump, talked up endlessly by the likes of Hannity and
Laura Ingraham, apologized for by Rush Limbaugh, and indulged far too deeply
for far too long by far too many others, rejects conservatism. He rejects free
trade. He rejects property rights. He rejects the rule of law. He rejects
limited government. He advocates a presidency a thousand times more imperial
than the one that sprung Athena-like from the brow of Barack Obama and his
lawyers. He meditates merrily upon the uses of political violence and riots, and
dreams of shutting down newspapers critical of him. He isn’t a conservative of
any stripe, and it is an outright lie to present him as anything other than
what he is.
What he is is the embodiment of the democratic passions
that kept John Adams up at night. Trumpkin democracy is the democracy that John
Adams warned us about.
A proper republic under the rule of law is, as Adams
wrote, “deaf as an adder to the clamors of the populace.” It is that which “no
passion can disturb” and “void of desire and fear, lust and anger,” being, as
it is, “mens sine affectu.” The Trump
movement is light on the mens, being
almost entirely affectu. Our law is a
law of property, commerce, trade, and individual rights. The democratic passion
— which informs the campaign of Bernie Sanders as much as it does that of
Donald Trump — rejects those things. It would see unpopular points of view
quashed, First Amendment be damned, a project already well under way among
Democrats seeking to criminalize dissenting views on global warming. The
democratic passion demands the expropriation of Apple and Goldman Sachs,
projects Trump considers with some glee. It demands a central-planning regime
in place of the free flow of goods and capital, not because that’s good
economics — it isn’t — but because such a regime would constitute an act of
economic and political violence against Them.
These ideas are on the rise in many places, notably among
adherents of Jean-Marie Le Pen’s Front Nationale in France and the Golden Dawn
in beleaguered Greece, which latter group, despite reports of its demise,
remains very much with us. In our time as in Adams’s time, the worst of human
nature is a threat amplified in the United States by the openness of our
society and the liberality of our institutions. Adams again:
While our country remains untainted
with the principles and manners which are now producing desolation in so many
parts of the world; while she continues sincere, and incapable of insidious and
impious policy, we shall have the strongest reason to rejoice in the local
destination assigned us by Providence. But should the people of America once
become capable of that deep simulation towards one another, and towards foreign
nations, which assumes the language of justice and moderation, while it is
practising iniquity and extravagance, and displays in the most captivating
manner the charming pictures of candour, frankness, and sincerity, while it is
rioting in rapine and insolence, this country will be the most miserable
habitation in the world. Because we have no government, armed with power,
capable of contending with human passions, unbridled by morality and religion.
Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords
of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made
only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the
government of any other. Oaths in this country are as yet universally considered
as sacred obligations. That which you have taken, and so solemnly repeated on
that venerable ground, is an ample pledge of your sincerity and devotion to
your country and its government.
As difficult as it is to imagine Donald Trump taking the
presidential oath of office, it is much more difficult to imagine him taking it
seriously, or indeed to imagine that there exists anything that is to him a
“sacred obligation.”
The federal character of the United States, and the
fractured nature of the federal government — its three coequal branches and its
further subdivided bicameral legislature — are designed to frustrate “We the
People” when the people fall into dangerous and violent error of the sort with
which they are now flirting. Yes, there are people in power maneuvering to
frustrate the will of “We the People” on a dozen different things, ranging from
economic and national-defense policy to the specific matter of Donald Trump’s
presidential campaign. That is prudence and patriotism, and the constitutional
architecture of these United States is designed to prevent democratic passion
from prevailing. Have your talk-radio temper tantrum. Have your riots. Our form
of government, even in its current distorted state, was designed to handle and
absorb your passions. You may dream of a dictator, but you will not have one.
No comments:
Post a Comment