Burt Folsom: First Principles of American Governance
[Burt Folsom is professor of history at Hillsdale College]
The vote on the healthcare bill was disappointing, and many advocates of limited government are planning tactics for the next stages of the debate–both on healthcare and on future interventions planned by the president. Such strategy sessions are worthwhile, but the larger problem is this: We don’t yet have enough Americans who recognize the advantages of limited government and the menace of centralized power and big federal programs.
The Founders had experience with big government–the English king–and they knew that liberty could not thrive when one man, or a group of men, had too much power. The Founders championed “natural rights,” God-given rights to life, liberty, and property–and in the Declaration of Independence and in the Constitution they divided political power among three branches of government. They also wrote a Bill of Rights to guarantee freedom from government harassment of speech, religion, and assembly.
By the 1900s, the progressives emerged and argued that centralizing power in a bigger government could lead enlightened rulers to create a better society for Americans. In 1944, FDR declared in an Economic Bill of Rights people have a right to a job, an education, and healthcare. But if such rights exist, who will pay for them? And if such rights exist, does the citizen have any obligations to work for them? FDR’s bill of rights tries fundamentally to alter the Founders’ conception of the promise of America. Whereas for the Founders, the issue was freedom; for FDR and the progressives, the issue is entitlement. The Founders wanted people to be able to pursue happiness; the progressives wanted to guarantee it. But, alas, human nature is such that when we give entitlements, we must heavily tax others. Those taxed lose their incentive to work. And those who receive the entitlements often lose their incentive to work as well. Free societies are dynamic and creative; unfree societies are stifling and lethargic. We have been steadily moving from one society to the other for the last 75 years. But we have free will, and we can move in the other direction again.
Three good books to read on this subject are Thomas Sowell, A Conflict of Visions: Ideological Origins of Political Struggles; Frederich Hayek, The Road to Serfdom; and Henry Hazlitt, Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest and Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics. Those excellent books make a powerful case for freedom.
Read entire article at burtfolsom.com
The vote on the healthcare bill was disappointing, and many advocates of limited government are planning tactics for the next stages of the debate–both on healthcare and on future interventions planned by the president. Such strategy sessions are worthwhile, but the larger problem is this: We don’t yet have enough Americans who recognize the advantages of limited government and the menace of centralized power and big federal programs.
The Founders had experience with big government–the English king–and they knew that liberty could not thrive when one man, or a group of men, had too much power. The Founders championed “natural rights,” God-given rights to life, liberty, and property–and in the Declaration of Independence and in the Constitution they divided political power among three branches of government. They also wrote a Bill of Rights to guarantee freedom from government harassment of speech, religion, and assembly.
By the 1900s, the progressives emerged and argued that centralizing power in a bigger government could lead enlightened rulers to create a better society for Americans. In 1944, FDR declared in an Economic Bill of Rights people have a right to a job, an education, and healthcare. But if such rights exist, who will pay for them? And if such rights exist, does the citizen have any obligations to work for them? FDR’s bill of rights tries fundamentally to alter the Founders’ conception of the promise of America. Whereas for the Founders, the issue was freedom; for FDR and the progressives, the issue is entitlement. The Founders wanted people to be able to pursue happiness; the progressives wanted to guarantee it. But, alas, human nature is such that when we give entitlements, we must heavily tax others. Those taxed lose their incentive to work. And those who receive the entitlements often lose their incentive to work as well. Free societies are dynamic and creative; unfree societies are stifling and lethargic. We have been steadily moving from one society to the other for the last 75 years. But we have free will, and we can move in the other direction again.
Three good books to read on this subject are Thomas Sowell, A Conflict of Visions: Ideological Origins of Political Struggles; Frederich Hayek, The Road to Serfdom; and Henry Hazlitt, Economics in One Lesson: The Shortest and Surest Way to Understand Basic Economics. Those excellent books make a powerful case for freedom.