The Constitution: A Rallying Point
August 31, 2008 by Aspen Eggimann · Leave a Comment
“Where are we going from here?”
I’ve been wondering this a lot lately, in regards to America. I hear and read theories about the Information Age and what it will bring, I learn about historical cycles predicting what to expect in the future, and observe the numerous political agendas proposed for the nation, yet still this question remains in a large part unanswered.
It may be difficult or nearly impossible to answer with clarity exactly where we are going, or to make a prediction that would quiet the concerns for the future. While pondering the question I read the following quote from Thomas Jefferson:
“Though written constitutions may be violated in moments of passion or delusion, yet they furnish a text to which those who are watchful may again rally and recall the people.” –Thomas Jefferson to Joseph Priestley, 1802
A written document that immortalizes principles and provides ongoing direction for generations is essential to maintain a strong and free nation.
“The Constitution is a written instrument. As such, its meaning does not alter. That which it meant when it was adopted, it means now.”
– South Carolina v. United States, 199 U.S. 437, 448 (1905)
The principles remain fast in the document, though the actions of men may not follow those principles. The violation of a constitution was foreseen by the Founders as inevitable; men would lose their perspective and deviate from the Constitution in moments of passion — no matter how much the “chains of the Constitution” bound them down. Having a written constitution does more than bind men for a time, however; its real strength is that it provides a rallying point for the People to turn to when the nation flounders and when guidance is needed.
It’s clear that we have deviated from the Constitution in many ways throughout our history, and recent years have been no different. From the repeal of habeas corpus for specified “enemy combatants” to the Patriot Act, we can see the distance we have come from the founding.
The governments’ disregard of our founding document was brought home to me when I read the following story from Ron Paul:
“In 2002, as war with Iraq loomed, I proposed that congress officially declare war against Iraq, making clear that I intended to oppose my own measure. The point was to underscore our constitutional responsibility to declare war before commencing major military operations, rather than leaving the decision to the president or passing resolutions that delegate to the president the decision-making power over war. The chairman of the International Relations Committee responded by saying, ‘There are things in the Constitution that have been overtaken by events, by time. Declaration of war is one of them. There are things no longer relevant to a modern society. We are saying to the president, use your judgment. [What you have proposed is] inappropriate, anachronistic; it isn’t done any more.’
What a relief that we have people in our government who will keep us posted on which constitution provisions they have decided are no longer ‘relevant!’” [Ron Paul; The Revolution: A Manifesto, pg 53]
As a nation that has disregarded its constitution and now strongly questions its stability and future freedom the question, “Where are we going from here?” demands our attention. We have, through fear and passion, given up much of our freedoms. But it need not continue. For we will decide what is next. By using the Constitution as a rallying point to recall a people we will regain the freedom and prosperity that the Founders fought for.
In the end our freedom and our future lie with those that are watchful, those that will take initiative in restoring the Constitution. As Thomas Edison said, “The strength of the Constitution, lies in the will of the people to defend it.”
If the question remains, “Where are we going from here?”, the answer is “Exactly where we take ourselves.” If Jefferson is right, if moments of passion will pass and those who are watching can rally the people, then let it be back to the Constitution.
Have YOU read and do you understand the Constitution? Will you become a constitutional scholar and help restore the American Republic?
Move the Cause of Liberty by (1) subscribing to the Sentinel, a free weekly newsletter boldly illuminating the principles of freedom in a darkening nation, and (2) pledging your Life, Liberty, and Sacred Honor to the Cause by signing the Declaration of Dependence.
Email This Post
Copyright © 2008 by The Cause of Liberty. All rights reserved.
And the Winners Are…
August 27, 2008 by Stephen Palmer · Leave a Comment
Thanks so much to everyone who helped us to gain 119 new newsletter subscribers this past week through our contest! We are very pleased with the great show of support and are excited to continue sharing the message of liberty to a broader audience.
Here are the contest winners:
Name |
Referrals |
| Gail Palmer | 25 |
| Brian Mecham | 14 |
| Laura Johnson | 13 |
| John Stewart | 12 |
| Chuck Stocking | 8 |
| Brandon Ottley | 7 |
| Heather Williamson | 7 |
| Lee Camblin | 7 |
| Seth Nelson | 5 |
(In case you’re wondering, Gail Palmer is not related to me.)
Question:
What ideas do you have that will help us to grow our subscriber list even further? How can we be more effective in sharing and marketing the Cause? We’d love to hear your input!
i Government
August 27, 2008 by Hyrum Lefler · 1 Comment
“Where, oh where, has my liberty gone?” we cry. Too often the answer is, “The ‘government’ stole it!”
One challenge we face as liberty-loving Americans is to bring politics and economics back into the first person. We speak of the “the government” and the “the economy” as if they were independent, conscious entities. The “government” is people, interacting with each other and operating according to forms and policies established by we the people and our duly elected representatives. Likewise, the “economy” is people (We the People!) interacting and acting according to economic forms and norms in the interest of bringing value to themselves and those they love.
Where has our liberty gone? It has gone into the oblivion of the third person — that third person being “i Government.” This is apparently a monster in D.C. that is ruining our lives.
The truth is that Liberty is not a product or even a state of being; it is a process and a lifestyle. It has always found its life and growth in history when people have lived it. It is not birthed or proliferated authentically through legislation or through civil disobedience in the streets.
This article could also be called “i Economy” based on the way we talk about the financial state of affairs in the nation. Has anyone ever seen “the economy?” Well, actually the answer is yes! You see him/her every day in the mirror, and you see economy in every relationship you have.
It is very easy for a nation looking for excuses to raise certain fearful illusions even to godlike status — with powerful abilities and magical powers for bestowing ease and power to its favorites. Unfortunately, this imagined god is also vengeful and will sometimes strike innocent people with undeserved punishments of poverty (against their will, of course). This imagined monster is blamed for stealing people’s liberty.
How To Make the Economy “First Person”
Families have become appendages in economy. They have become flies on the elephant, giving up their place as the central economic source of resources and growth in our economy. With the rise of the Industrial Revolution, and the massive economic shifts that the U.S. underwent in the first half of the 20th Century, came the rise of the consumer-finance industry. You may have heard of the original Sears and Robuck Magazines that came out in the 1920’s, offering American “consumers” (yet another identity that has risen) an array of products on credit. They swept the nation and are a symptom of the rising obsession with material products. A new economy rose; one that has been fueled, burned to charcoal, then burned again and again — on the fires of consumer whims.
A people obsessed with enjoying the fruits before performing the labor will sell even their liberty — indeed they will have to when their resources are depleted. The number one way for American families to bring “the economy” into the first person is for them to take back the direct responsibility and control of their economy. How do they do this? They must adopt economic forms that are conducive to liberty. This is where Georgics come in.
Citizens must learn and apply the timeless lesson that we reap what we sow, and apply it in their financial lives in the following ways:
- Never borrow to consume.
- Spend less than you earn.
- Plant the “seeds” of your capital by invest your savings into people and projects that will bring you the “harvest” of a financial return.
Making the Government First Person
The cliché answers are varied: “get involved,” “vote,” “write your Congressman,” watch the news,” and “speak out for what you believe.” The truth must be admitted: you are the government! I offer a challenge:
Name one person in this entire nation that has more direct responsibility for this nation’s happiness, future, policies, laws, and every other reality, than YOU.
Maybe you would say the President has more responsibility than you. Is that really true, when he is only our representative? If I grant a friend authority to do something for me, it is assumed that in that responsibility I hold the ultimate authority even though I have delegated some task or thing that I could not do myself. We cannot all be President of the United States at the same time, but we are all citizens. If we should not point the finger at anyone but ourselves for the state of the nation, then it is certainly childish to point the finger at our President for the state of our personal financial statements.
I recently listened to a program featured on National Public Radio where a woman called in on the subject of the housing foreclosure spike we are seeing currently. She made the point that she did not hear the media admitting the follies of the people who had signed their names for risky variable interest rate loans. The NPR host was polite at first, but ended up cutting the woman off saying, “Even irresponsible people suffer sometimes, Mam.”
That statement tripped me up for a few minutes. Clearly the host felt it effective to dismiss the truth of the caller’s words with mockery — hinting that this woman was some kind of conservative believer that there is no suffering, only consequences. The fact that the media will not address, let alone admit, the irresponsible financial actions of millions of Americans is another symptom of the upside down nature of our society; a society where courage fails and appeasement reigns. By lifting their audience above reproach, for popularity reasons, the media contributes to their slavery.
The term “i Government” is an interesting mixture of humor and irony. We have formed this identity to shift responsibility from ourselves, and yet the term also makes one ponder the concept of personal governance. Unfortunately, the former interpretation of the phrase is a more accurate description of our contemporary perceptions of the source of responsibility and liberty.
Have you ever considered that it is Americans that have (through their Representatives) laid taxes on other Americans to finance desired benefits? As Benjamin Franklin said, “When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic.” Americans are selling their liberties in exchange for other Americans’ goods and at the expense of their fellow Americans!
Is YOUR palm open facing up, asking for an ear of corn… or facing down, grappling a metaphorical hoe, as you till the ground to plant seeds of production? Are “YOU the Government” taxing or producing?
Move the Cause of Liberty by (1) subscribing to the Sentinel, a free weekly newsletter boldly illuminating the principles of freedom in a darkening nation, and (2) pledging your Life, Liberty, and Sacred Honor to the Cause by signing the Declaration of Dependence.
Email This Post
Copyright © 2008 by The Cause of Liberty. All rights reserved.
Growing, or Dying?
August 26, 2008 by Adam Hailstone · 5 Comments
Al-Qaida’s Post-Iraq Strength
Make no mistake — the “surge” is working. US combat deaths are at their lowest levels since the beginning of the occupation. Political steps are being made. Iraqi police and military forces are improving. Locals are rising up against terrorists.
Although I was against the war in the first place, in part for the same reasons Dick Cheney was against going into Baghdad during Desert Storm, I feel that leaving, after stirring up the hornet’s nest, would make the Iraqi people victims of not only Saddam’s regime, but another. We should not walk away now.
However the long term goal is not just a politically free and prosperous Iraq, as good as that may be, but winning the war on terror. Despite US gains, a major debate in political and military circles is whether or not al-Qaida is becoming stronger or weaker.
A Shift in Focus
The subgroup al-Qaida in Iraq (AQI) has definitely seen its setbacks, with increased coalition troop levels and a backlash from Sunni populations that used to support the terrorist organization. However disturbing trends and parallels have arisen recently that make us question our real progress.
Many leaders and recruits of AQI have been leaving the Iraq war zone for Afghanistan and the mountainous/tribal regions of Pakistan. This sounds like a retreat. However they have not stopped fighting. They have taken it to another place where US troops are stationed. There, they are making new gains.
AQI trained fighters are the most experienced of al-Qaida’s forces. They have designed more powerful IED’s and more lethal suicide-bombing than ever seen before. They are the most ruthless and pitiless fighters in the world. Most of all they have experience fighting the best military on the planet, US troops.
Now that they are regrouping in a relative “safe haven,” tribal Pakistan, they can continue testing their arsenal against us. This is not good in terms of the Afghanistan front, even if NATO leadership can convince member nations to commit troops for an Afghan version of the surge. With the added benefit of a retreat into a politically volatile Pakistan, and with the experience of Iraq behind them, al-Qaida will have their best in Afghanistan to fight NATO at every turn.
Jihad Parallels
According to the Koran a Jihad is justified in two circumstances. One, a “defensive Jihad” when a Muslim country is being attacked, then all “believers” must seek to defend it. The second can be read, and is by most extremists, as the justification of un-provoked attacks against non-Muslims. However the first is seen, by most Muslims, as more acceptable.
In 1978 the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan. Many Muslims, believing in the principle of Jihad, left their homelands and joined the effort to repel the Russian occupation. One of these was Asama bin Laden. By the time this war was over in 1988, bin Laden and many of his fellow fighters formed al-Qaida with the vision of overthrowing all Muslim nations that did not have a “Taliban style” theocratic government. The strategy was to attack the west and then Muslim nations with pro-western governments would slowly fall apart as the west retreated from their support.
Although we have seen the opposite response from many western nations, the US invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan has inspired a new Jihad with thousands of recruits coming from around the world. Just like bin Laden and his comrades once did. However this time there is a complex and well funded organization to welcome them.
On August 12 of this year a US National Intelligence Officer (NIO), Ted Gistaro, reported:
“…al-Qaida is identifying, training, and positioning operatives for attacks in the West, likely including in the United States. These operatives include North American and European citizens and legal residents with passports that allow them to travel to the United States without a U.S. visa.
“Al-Qaida’s ability to establish and manage links to other affiliated terrorist groups and facilitation networks is a key indicator of its organizational health. These links help bolster its operational and propaganda reach”.
The adage “if we fight them over there, they will be less likely to fight us here” may be true for now, but that very fight is creating a new group of fighters. Once we leave, like the Soviets did, even with a free and prospering Iraq, a new group of 9-11 type terrorists will be plotting further attacks against the United States and its allies.
Losing in Iraq, Consolidating Elsewhere
Ted Gistaro also reported:
In September 2006, al-Qaida consolidated jihadist forces in North Africa under its banner by merging Algerian and later Libyan terrorist groups into al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM). AQIM has continued to focus on Algerian government targets…since the merger, AQIM has conducted at least eight attacks against Western interests in the region, including two simultaneous suicide car bomb attacks in Algiers in December — including one against the UN building that killed nearly seventy people. AQIM is training growing numbers of operatives from every country in the Maghreb and the Sahel.
In Saudi Arabia, authorities continue to detain al-Qaida linked extremists…Yemen is rapidly reemerging as a jihadist battleground and potential base of operations. A March mortar attack against the U.S. embassy and two attacks against the president’s compound in late-April underscore the al-Qaeda threat there.
These reports, and many more like them that stretch from Morocco to Indonesia, show that al-Qaida is organizing and becoming more powerful. I do not believe we can, or should, invade each of these nation-states.
My Question for You
Though we are seeing success in Iraq and have not had a Jihadist terrorist attack in the United States since September 11, 2001, we are seeing the terrorist organization responsible for that attack spreading. In future posts I will go into more detail on what I think the US strategy should be. However, please give us your thoughts below on what you think the US strategy should be in the war on terror. Let’s get a conversation going.
Move the Cause of Liberty by (1) subscribing to the Sentinel, a free weekly newsletter boldly illuminating the principles of freedom in a darkening nation, and (2) pledging your Life, Liberty, and Sacred Honor to the Cause by signing the Declaration of Dependence.
Email This Post
Copyright © 2008 by The Cause of Liberty. All rights reserved.
Tired of Losing Jobs Overseas?
August 23, 2008 by Shane Schulthies · 1 Comment
Blame the Deficit, Not Free Trade
We read in the paper “Another 60,000 jobs lost overseas.” We haven’t had a positive balance in trade since 1975. We are losing our domestic manufacturing at an unprecedented rate. From almost every direction the cry is made for fair trade. We are told that we must increase tariffs or our domestic economy will be ruined and we will become a third-world country, that the large multinational corporations are making huge profits at the expense of Americans, and that laws should be passed to prevent them from moving their manufacturing overseas.
While the loss of manufacturing has serious consequences, including a threat to our national security, the answer is not to be found in further restricting free trade. Theoretically free trade will not, in fact cannot, result in a trade deficit.
Let us assume that the money stock is held constant at 1.6 trillion dollars (the level of M2 in 1980) and the United States unilaterally removed all tariffs. Companies might immediately import cheaper goods; our balance of trade would initially become negative. Money would flow out of the United States as commodities flowed in, but this is only a short-term effect. In the long run, as the United States becomes commodity-rich but money-poor, imports would naturally decrease and exports would naturally increase.
To put it another way, if we constantly imported more that we exported, we would run out of money, imports would naturally cease, unless we increased exports to get our money back in order to buy more imports. How then has it then been possible to maintain trade deficits every year since 1975?
Money Supply
The answer is found in our monetary and fiscal policy. First, let’s look at the money supply. Since 1959 the money supply (M2) has increased an average of 7.2% per year. This means that the money supply has doubled approximately every 10 years. In fact, since 1980 the money supply has increased from $1.6 trillion to over $6.8 trillion, which is an additional $5.2 trillion available to buy imports and maintain the trade deficit.
Where did all of that money come from? It works something like this: If the Fed sees an economic slowdown they seek to stimulate the economy by increasing the overall demand for new products and services. Now advertising might create more demand for one product but how do you increase demand for all products in the US economy? Simple, you must increase the supply of money. When everyone gets more money, they feel the need to spend a large portion of it, and overall demand for new products increases.
Let’s say that the Fed wanted to increase the money supply by $10 billion. They would do so through their open market operations. Just like you or I can buy bonds on the open market, so too can the Fed. The difference is that you or I must buy bonds with money that we have saved, while the Fed buys them with money that they create. In this case they buy $10 billion in bonds and print the money as payment, so to speak. Those who sell the bonds then put the money in their banks around the country, thus increasing the money supply by $10 billion. This is not the end, however. Ninety to ninety-seven percent (based on the reserve requirement depending on the size of the bank) of this is again loaned out, which increases the money supply by an additional $9 billion. All told, that’s an additional $19 billion in potential trade deficit.
Fiscal Policy
Now let’s look at fiscal policy. What happens to all those dollars overseas? Can China spend U.S. dollars in their economy? No. They do keep a supply (and quite a large supply) on hand in order to manipulate the foreign exchange market in their favor, but they can’t use all those dollars.
The answer lies in our capital markets. Consumer products are not the only demand of money in our economy. The economy also needs capital to replace worn out equipment, build new factors, and pay new workers etc. The capital to build these things comes from our savings. We save and buy bonds, stocks, real estate etc. But quite frankly, we don’t save enough. In addition, the government competes directly with industry for our saved dollars. The greater the government deficits, the more money is pulled from industry to fund it.
But our savings is not the only supply of capital investment. Central banks and large corporations all over the world have an unending supply of U.S. dollars due to our expanding money supply and constant trade deficit. Foreign investment in the form of U.S. dollars that we used by buy our imports return and buy our real estate, our companies, and fund our public and private debts. The circle is complete. The Fed prints money and puts it into circulation by buying private and public debts (bonds). This money allows us to buy more overseas than we sell, creating trade deficits. The excess money returns to the United States and foreign governments, and investors buy our real estate, companies, and private and public debt. It’s a great program, except in the long run they will eventually own all we have, or more likely they will stop investing in the United States, causing serious strain on our economy.
The solution? Slow down our expanding money supply and stop running government deficits, which will be discussed in subsequent articles.
Shane S. Schulthies
Dr. Schulthies received his Ph.D. in Exercise Science from Brigham Young University where he subsequently taught for thirteen years. He also has degrees in Physical Therapy and Sports Medicine. In 2004 he left tenured professor life to mentor at George Wythe University.
He has a broad background in academics, consulting, business, and government. He is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in Constitutional Law. He is married to the former Kimberly Hanson. They have ten children and reside in Cedar City, Utah.
Contact Shane at sschulthies[at]gw[dot]edu.
Move the Cause of Liberty by (1) subscribing to the Sentinel, a free weekly newsletter boldly illuminating the principles of freedom in a darkening nation, and (2) pledging your Life, Liberty, and Sacred Honor to the Cause by signing the Declaration of Dependence.
Email This Post
Copyright © 2008 by The Cause of Liberty. All rights reserved.
-
Free Newsletter Subscription
Subscribe to The Sentinel, a free weekly newsletter boldly illuminating the principles of freedom in a darkening nation, and receive two free gifts. Your personal information will never be shared.
Subscribe To The Cause Of LibertyPolls
Loading ... Loading ... Loading ...