Thursday, January 26, 2017

January 24, 2017


To whom it may concern:

I have decided to make a submission for publication. This is 700 words.
Thank you for your attention.

Lynn Swartos,
P.O. Box 129
Great Falls, MT 59403
(406) 671-6628
klmfs2009@gmail.com


Like a great animal shaking itself free of restraint the ocean roils and heaves under the fading light, but the detritus of rot will not be shaken off; and now penetrates to once clear depths.

Writers who do not define their terms can be difficult to understand and when dauntlessly asseverating of politics in such terms lead one to seriously wonder if, as Darwin believed it more frequently so, ignorance rather than knowledge has begotten their confidence.
       This possibility exists in Joe Lieberman and Jon Huntsman’s latest claim to knowledge of an emerging new center in American politics, wherein we shall find solutions to our “most urgent problems” if only we join them there. Whether this is a genuinely Liberal or Progressive—that is totalitarian—center they do not say. But it seems like the same empty line progressive mountebanks have been selling. Therefore their proposition’s location must be determined and evaluated.
       Our culture had its beginnings in individuals agreeing together to govern themselves. So were formed communities that eventually begat states and ultimately the United States government. The authority to govern originated locally in the consent of the governed and emanated from there, but without renouncing the legitimacy of self-governance at every level. Thus lines of authority were demarcated, duties defined, purposes recognized.
       Today’s culture is a model of the inverse, we are commanded by force from the top down so that we are no longer our own masters and our customs accord with Montesquieu’s dictum, they are a part of our servitude—invalidating democracy; and local, personal, and associational freedoms are negated by this irresistible foreign authority—invalidating liberalism.
       The authors do not confess support for this political illegitimacy but neither do they object. Instead they propose to knead some Democrats and moderate Republicans, for what they are worth, into one bland lump dedicated, they say, to defeating polarization and gridlock and instilling their “core political values – opportunity, security, accountability and ingenuity.” This gives their political features a semblance of righteousness. Until, that is, the impartial light of history reveals their “goods” are provided at the pleasure of a state entirely foreign to liberal democracy, that ever forces itself, most intimately, into our lives, and never lets go, judging and forcing us to comply with its corrupting ukase. We can, therefore, be sure they oppose bigotry, which means views contrary to theirs held by republican liberals who dare march under the banners of liberty and equality; who defend the rule of law, of justice and decency; who understand that for as long as reality has existed, just as the laws of science exist with no beginning or end so to permanent values of right (and wrong) called traditional, and that make their holders better human beings—duty, good courage, and beneficence, for example—have never passed away or been subject to revision. It is for good reason that conservators of liberalism hold traditions and mores, formed of habits, attitudes and ideas that shape a salubrious culture, not to be tinkered with by those who tempt the credulous, the careworn, or those of weak or malformed character with the indulgence of rebellious appetites fulfilled by intellect unmediated by just sentiments.
        Lieberman and Huntsman say they want to bring polarization and gridlock to an end.  But Americans have grown so far apart in their political conceptions that common ground has slipped into the intervening void. These mutually exclusive antipodes were created predominately by a divergence in the United States culture and its defining ethics. For instance, progressives want control of each little bit of our lives; liberals think that progressives should mind their own business.
       It comes as no surprise then that progressives have demonstrated no respect for society’s organic structure, destroying old authorities while forcing acceptance of their jurisdiction over society by force of government. Nonetheless, Americans of a liberal vintage do not surrender well.
       Progressives’ politics of domination are hostile to freedom and have thus redrawn our original blueprint for order in order to, by degrees, further centralize and legitimize their power over us. Understanding human and political nature as reluctant to relinquish power once acquired we may dispense with hopes, anytime soon, of a regenerated constitutional republic.


1.      Evolutionary Writings, Ed., James A. Secord, p. 234,

2. Montesquieu wrote, “The customs of an enslaved people are a part of their servitude, those of a free people are a part of their liberty.” Furthermore, the principle of a republic is virtue, that of despotism is fear, said he. The Spirit of Laws, p. 142, 13)

No comments:

Post a Comment