A response to Mr. Frank Dowse.
In a previous post Frank Dowse took me to task for challenging Congressional candidate Jacquie Atkinson’s foreign policy views. My thoughts below summarize what I see as the distinctives that separate a Christian and a principled policy view from a humanist and progressive one.
Who is Frank Douse who goes by the pen name “Founding Father”?
“Dowse is a retired Marine Officer. He was the USMC Commandant’s Fellow at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government, receiving an MA in International Security Affairs. These are his observations based on over 30 years involved in counter-terror, intelligence, and defense operational planning, implementation and execution as an active-duty officer and DoD civilian official.”
I think the reason you are unable to answer my question is because it exposes the immorality of your policy view.
You not only have little in common with our founding fathers, you have rejected the basis of their law system, “laws of nature and Nature’s God.” Their policy view presupposes a Creator and therefore a transcendent law that governs all men. In their view all men are equal before the law. There is therefore no room for a hegemon as your view requires.
Your view is a progressive one which aborts the individual and the Creator to make room for a new king – man and the State. You have carved the Creator into an idol that now supports your humanistic foreign policy. Your conscience can now be assuaged on Sunday by your actions on Monday.
Noticeably absent in your writing are references to principle. Your position demonstrates a complete dependence on experience, the essence of progressive humanism. And if you will excuse me, the fruit of a Harvard education.
Harvard has been progressive when Charles William Eliot became Dean in 1869. Eliot applied Darwin’s theory of evolution to education and changed Harvard’s motto from Veritas Christo et Ecclesiae, meaning “Truth for Christ and the Church” to “Veritas” meaning “Truth”. Truth became disconnected and autonomous from Christ and the laws of nature in the same way you state our views on policy must change as our environment changes/evolves. Like Eliot, a Unitarian, you desire man to be autonomous from principle.
The harms you attempt to nobly thwart around the world are for the most part a byproduct of your morality. You do not respect your neighbor. Your view justifies the initiation of violence against a person who poses no such threat to you or your family. One with such views will always create more enemies than his neighbor and will point to such threats as continued justification for additional violence.
Your comment “Ron Paul’s virtual evaporation from the political scene…has been roundly rejected by the electorate” offers a case in point.
In your view man, “the electorate,” is king and our moral standard not “the laws of nature and Nature’s God.” Your view seeks to justify immorality based upon the autonomous will of man “the electorate” apart from higher law. This is the philosophy that buttresses statism, voids natural rights and destroys the individual to make way for the state. This view allows two wolves and a sheep to vote on lunch. It justified slavery. It is this immoral view of law that has de-educated the electorate, creating acceptance for the humanism of Obama, Sanders, Hillary and Trump .
There are two sources of threats to our nation, internal and external. As Lincoln noted our greatest threat would be internal. I happen to agree with him. I believe your policy view is responsible for most of the terror we face, most of the debt that burdens our families and most of the freedom we have lost responding to blowback.
The world we live may be “complex” and “intricate” but it in no way voids the operation of “the laws of nature and Nature’s God.” Triangles still have three sides. Apples fall rather than rise from trees. Theft, tyranny and the initiation of violence remain evil unless of course our philosophy rejects such a thing as a Creator and such a thing as “good.”
Ideas have consequences. Your faith is in man and your own ideas and experience. My faith and reason are submitted to higher law, something greater than myself. As Augustine stated peace with God precedes peace in the home, in society and in the state. Like Augustine I am rightly or wrongly of the opinion that your policy view, and Atkinson’s, will be an instrument for tyranny, violence, debt and terror until your ideas are reconciled to those of the Creator and the ideas our nation was founded.
I am not nearly as worried about the third world immigrant looking for employment as I am the white collar veteran seeking more power in our society who holds your view.
If you consider yourself either Christian or conservative I think you have some soul searching to do.
* * *
Eric Andersen is a member of the Central Committee of the San Diego County Republican Party and former Caucus Chair for the 71st Assembly District. He is the current Chair and Co-Founder of the Republican Liberty Caucus of San Diego County and Co-Founder of im2moro.com. He is a former Rock Church Citizen of the Year.