Thursday, March 28, AD 2024 4:29am

The Crisis at Which We Are Arrived

President Obama seems to carry the world view that of an elite academic, that all the problems this nation faces can be solved with government intervention through high taxes and and legislation that enacts social engineering of a society of independence to that of dependence.

Or as the average layman would say, President Obama is a socialist, plain and simple.

I understand the subtleties of his liberal leanings and his good intentions, but the path to Hell is often made with good intentions.  With the failed Communist experiment in Russia in 1988 and the current economic collapse of Greece with Spain and Portugal on the horizon to experience the same, I don’t see how more spending with money we don’t have for welfare programs that we don’t need will solve our economic woes.

William Kristol wrote a piece for the Weekly Standard that fleshes out the crossroads our great nation stands at.

After an unequivocal experience of the inefficacy of the subsisting federal government, you are called upon to deliberate on a new Constitution for the United States of America. The subject speaks its own importance; comprehending in its consequences nothing less than the existence of the UNION, the safety and welfare of the parts of which it is composed, the fate of an empire in many respects the most interesting in the world. It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force. If there be any truth in the remark, the crisis at which we are arrived may with propriety be regarded as the era in which that decision is to be made; and a wrong election of the part we shall act may, in this view, deserve to be considered as the general misfortune of mankind.

Alexander Hamilton, Federalist 1

We are not now quite at a founding moment, or even a re-founding moment. But we have arrived at a genuine crisis, or a set of crises, and we may well be at a decisive moment for the country.

This sense of crisis is what animates the Tea Parties. I had the pleasure of attending the “Proud to be an American July 4th Tea Party” outside Independence Hall in Philadelphia. It featured patriotic songs and speeches, and expressions of support for our troops and praise for our country. Yet the mood of patriotic gratitude was mixed with expressions of alarm from my fellow Tea Partiers about the administration now in charge of our government. The combination of patriotic gratitude and urgent alarm produces a determination to act and a willingness to deal boldly with the crises in the economy, in foreign policy, and in self-government that the country faces.

In this respect, the Tea Parties are ahead of the two major parties. As established political parties are wont to do, both remain constricted in their views, attached to business as usual, and invested in established modes and orders—too much so to easily come to grips with a moment like the present.

Of course, the leaders of the Democratic party don’t want to come to grips with the present moment. Committed to stale progressive policies, they’re doing their very best to push more of them through, even as the failure of those policies becomes ever more evident. Serious reflection on the failure of their favored policies, both at home and abroad, would be too painful. It would require a rethinking too consequential and too disruptive to be willingly undertaken. After all, experience has shown that liberals are more disposed to have the rest of us suffer, than to right themselves by rethinking the dogmas by which they are enthralled.

But it’s increasingly clear that “the inefficacy of the subsisting federal government,” in our case welfare state liberalism, is no longer sufferable. Out-of-control spending and debt really do threaten our economic future. Weakness and timidity abroad really do threaten a world in which terrorists and fanatics possess, and use, nuclear weapons. The nanny state, at once all-intrusive and all thumbs, really does threaten the future of self-government. The dogmas of multiculturalism really do threaten the strength of a free society.

I was telling a friend about the Philly Tea Party, noting a few eccentric proposals from some of its participants. He commented, “Well, that’s better than talking points.” He’s right. At this moment, bold and seemingly impolitic or impractical ideas are more useful than the diligent repetition of mostly sensible short-term critiques and proposals. At a moment like this, talking points are not enough.

That’s the challenge for the Republican party. It is of course a real, existing political party, with real existing responsibilities. So it has to do the day-to-day work of a loyal opposition—helping Generals Petraeus, Mattis, and Odierno to win the wars we’re fighting and which we certainly can’t afford to lose, resisting foolish Obama administration programs and appointments, proposing legislation and amendments that would improve public policy or at least highlight the difference between the two parties.

But the GOP can be the party of the future as well as the present. It can be the party of fundamental reflection and radical choice as well as the party of day-to-day criticism and opposition. This isn’t easy. It can lead to mistakes and missteps, tensions and confusions. But it’s what the moment requires.

So fear not the Tea Parties. Be open to fundamental reforms. Belt-tightening and program-trimming, more transparency and greater efficiency, are not enough. The danger for Republicans isn’t that they will address the current crisis too boldly. It’s that they won’t be bold enough.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
5 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Donald R. McClarey
Admin
Sunday, July 11, AD 2010 5:25am

“Or as the average layman would say, President Obama is a socialist, plain and simple.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/09/majority-likely-voters-agree-socialist-accurately-describes-obama/

Bill Sr.
Bill Sr.
Sunday, July 11, AD 2010 10:53am

This question was raised recently.
If they return to power, will the Republicans accuse the Obamacrats of being the party of No?? Hey, news flash, they already are the party of No!

No more tax cuts. Let the Bush tax cuts expire.
No more secret ballots. Unions rule.
No more drilling. Cripple big business and suffocate the little ones.
No more private insurance. The government is your Nanny now.
No more Constitution. Rule by Executive order and a puppet Supreme Court.
No more free speech. Only media approved by the White House permitted.
No more prosecution for voter fraud or intimidation. We won, you lost Brother.
No more mention of God. Nancy and Harry are BHO’s anointed angels for us.
No more sanctity in marriage. Homosexuality is to be taught in school and encouraged.
And one way or another it must be established (By the U.N. if necessary)….
No more guns for the citizens. Only those for BHO’s promised Civilian Security Force which is to be as well equipped and funded as our current military.

In short No More America as we knew it before the messiah who according to our first black president, Bill Clinton, did what any good democrat like say Robert Byrd did (joined the KKK). “in order to get elected” and serve admirably in West Virginia.
Obama, who has since admitted being Muslim, joined a “Christian” church to mask himself for public consumption by voters.But who knew Rev. Wright’s true colors until it was too late? Well obviously Barack Hussein Obama surely did

T. Shaw
T. Shaw
Sunday, July 11, AD 2010 11:13am

The furtive enemies of the soul; the most dire threats (fundamentally change) to our country and our way of life; the foes of freedom are in the white House and congress.

c matt
c matt
Monday, July 12, AD 2010 12:23pm

Weakness and timidity abroad really do threaten a world in which terrorists and fanatics possess, and use, nuclear weapons.

Not sure exactly where you are going with this. It could be argued that our rather ill thought out ventures abroad also threaten the world. The statement seems to lack a certain balance.

No disagreement with the other concerns.

Art Deco
Art Deco
Monday, July 12, AD 2010 2:37pm

It could be argued that our rather ill thought out ventures abroad also threaten the world.

Argued by people paying little attention to the implications of what they are saying. “The World” is not threatened by American troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Al Qaeda is threatened.

Discover more from The American Catholic

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading

Scroll to Top