America started off as a form of ordered anarchy; it has evolved into a kind of despotism.
I speak here of the type of despotism described by de Tocqueville, a “brand of orderly, gentle, peaceful slavery” that could be combined “with some of the external forms of freedom” the ultimate purpose of which is to relieve citizens (and now, even non-citizens) “from the trouble of thinking and all the cares of living.” The most recent iteration of this is the “democratic socialism” (old wine, new wineskins) that is now all the rage.
The ideals of the American Revolution—namely the necessity of limited government to secure the blessings of liberty—have been dead for a long time. In fact, some might argue that they started their long decline soon after the Revolution, with the establishment of the Constitution itself. A statement by Melancton Smith—a lawyer, landowner, politician, and statesmen in the style of so many of the Founders—at the New York ratifying convention fairly captures that argument:
“A few years ago we fought for liberty—We framed a general government of free principles—We placed the state legislatures…between the Congress and the People….[b]ut now it is proposed…to give the new government [as proposed under the Constitution] free access to our pockets and ample command of our persons….”
All things corrupt over time. The trend since the Civil War has been a consolidation of federal power. This culminated in the New Deal and has continued almost unabated since then. As for “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness,” the phrase becomes less certain the more one looks at it.
In fact, there is a through line from “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness” (or even worse, “equality”) to the clamor for rights to healthcare and housing. Those words had a specific meaning at the time Jefferson wrote them, but are now just a grab bag of personal preferences. Again de Tocqueville:
Democratic Man “naturally turns his eyes towards that huge entity which alone stands out above the universal level of abasement. His needs, and even more his longings, continually put him in mind to that entity; he ends up regarding it as the sole and necessary support of his individual weakness.”
Conservatives have been trying to put the genie back in the bottle since the 1970s. The results are mixed at best. The only check on those impulses was the general consensus that there were limits to the power of the federal government. However, as one of the many pseudonymous writers at the time of ratification put it:
“It is alleged that the opinion and the manners of the People of America are capable to resist and prevent an extension of prerogative or oppression; but you must recollect that opinion and manners are mutable, and may not always be a permanent obstruction against the encroachments of government.”
On the eve of America’s 250th, I find myself thankful but apprehensive. America as a geographic reality may go on for centuries, as have many nations. But modern Greece is hardly an aspiration. No, if America is to be something more than just a place (which so many formally great nations have become) then there must be a transformation.
To quote Joseph de Maistre—another lawyer/scholar/diplomat known for his social commentary on the French Revolution (essentially the French Edmund Burke):
“No nation owes its character to the government….on the contrary, it owes its government to its character.…[i]f you see a nation in decline, this is not because its government is bad; it is because this government…dies like all human works, or rather it is because the national character is worn out. Then nations must undergo a political rebirth, or perish….”
Joe Sheffo is a resident of Encinitas and a former editor at the North County Times. More recently, he has worked as an auditor for the State of California, including nine years at the State Auditor’s office.