By: Oletta Branstiter
Alexis de Tocqueville quote said it best in his book Democracy in America, published in 1835:
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations has been 200 years.”
This is precisely why, our Founders, in their divinely-inspired wisdom, fashioned our nation as a Democratic Republic – a government founded on the Rule of Law instead of the Rule of Man. The multi-layered checks and balances embedded in our Constitution (yes, even the Electoral College!) provides a “firewall” against the tyranny of the majority.
Sadly, the inclination to vote “largesse from the public treasury” started long before the historic election of 2012. Both Democrats and Republicans have been voting to bribe the electorate for decades, with unconstitutional and immoral “welfare” programs that steal from the taxpayers and usurp every blessing of charity.
In an 1884 book written by dime novelist and non-fiction author Edward S. Ellis, Colonel David Crockett (yes, that Davy Crockett) is recorded as giving a speech critical of his Congressional colleagues who were willing to spend taxpayer dollars to help a widow of a U.S. Navy man. According to the story, Horatio Bunce, a constituent of the congressman, reprimanded his representative for violating his oath of office: “…while you are contributing to relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he. If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000. If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at liberty to give to any and everything which you may believe, or profess to believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other.” Admonished, Congressman Crockett vowed to never miss an opportunity to atone for his misconduct, delivering an historic speech to Congress in 1828, imploring his fellow representatives to resist the temptation to violate the Constitution by voting to appropriate tax dollars for charity.
Sadly, according to historic record, and disputing Ellis’ legend, Crockett represented the minority vote and Congress firmly established the proclivity to bestow largesse from the public coffers. Whether out of compassion or constituent bribery, the result was the same: loose fiscal policy that violates our Constitution and usurps the blessings of individual benevolence, forsaking Rule of Law for Rule of Man. When citizens meet the needs of their neighbors, there is accountability through relationship. When government takes from taxpayers to give to strangers, bitterness and irresponsibility are the consequences. Government becomes the benevolent “master” of the dependent class through legislation that codifies theft.
Constitutionalism, weakened and abandoned from generations of disregard and abuse, was dealt a final blow on November 6, 2012. The political fight is over. Progressivism is the victor. The dependent class has been bribed into voting for public charity. Marxism is our future. Unless…
While our battle to protect and defend our Constitution at the polls is lost, there is a front on which the war may be won. A teacher I know conducted an experiment at her school last month. In preparation for a mock election, she instructed her students to vote for ideology instead of candidate. Amazingly, when the parties’ ideology was defined, every one of her students voted Republican (without knowing which party each candidate represented). These pre-teens agreed with smaller government, lower taxes, individual responsibility and Constitutional principles. Once they were told which candidates represented which party, only four of her students violated their own ideology to vote for Barack Obama. Most of them were astonished to learn that he did not represent the Republican platform. Overall, the students of her school voted for Obama over Romney, three to one, based on the information they were absorbing from their parents and mainstream media.
We must educate the next generation of voters. Mentor your neighborhood children, volunteer to give civics lessons at your local school, host a summer “Patriot” camp… teach our future electorate that Socialism is a failed system and only Capitalism under the Rule of Law guarantees sustainable government.