How Things Change... and Not Always for the Better
by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Alexander Hamilton, speech at the New York Ratifying Convention, 1788
Even Hamilton, a supporter of a strong federal government understood that which so many seem to either have simply forgotten or chose to ignore."There are certain social principles in human nature, from which we may draw the most solid conclusions with respect to the conduct of individuals and of communities. We love our families more than our neighbors; we love our neighbors more than our countrymen in general. The human affections, like solar heat, lose their intensity as they depart from the centre... On these principles, the attachment of the individual will be first and for ever secured by the State governments. They will be a mutual protection and support."
It seems apparent as the progressive movement becomes ever more embedded in the fabric of a nation, the greater the power of the federal government becomes.
Part of the progressive's plan is, and always has been, to make each of the individual state governments dependent upon the federal government to the greatest extent possible.
By increasing the dependency of the states on federal dollars {read taxpayer's dollars}the fed effectively reduces the role of the individual states in their citizens lives.
As the progressive trend marches on, the natural and inevitable result will be almost total dependency on a large federal government, often called the nanny state by some.
Just a few random thoughts on what was a rather random kind of day yesterday.
we cannot put all the blame upon the progressives, my friend. they are only taking advantage of a situation that had already existed. this situation goes all the way back to 1925 when it was determined that the federal Constitution applied to the States as well as the federal government. it was then when we became united under the federal government rather than united by the Constitution
ReplyDeleteeach State must accept responsibility for their own actions also and nobody forced them to take federal moneys.
I understand and partially agree. However, I view the issue from the perspective that the first "progressive" was TR and the natural evolution of the progressive mindset would be 1925.
ReplyDelete1925 was certainly not what 2010 is but again the result of what I see as a "natural evolutionary" progression of flawed philosophical {ethical/political} thought.
There as been acceptance of progressivism even within the broader scope the conservative movement.
The bottom line is you are right. The conservative movement eventually fell in line, albeit just a bit delayed, or behind the progressives.
Conservative politicians are no different than the progressive politician. they both have the tools of power and force and are willing to use them in order to maintain their hold on power.
ReplyDeletePrecisely. That is why Ayn Rand held that philosophy and objective analysis {this includes motive} was important and critical to liberty and a rational society.
ReplyDelete