opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Ben Shapiro
Ben Shapiro
3 Feb 2016
The Establishment Is Dead

In Monday's Iowa caucus, Senator Ted Cruz, R-Texas, the man most hated by the Republican establishment, came … Read More.

27 Jan 2016
Anti-Establishment Does Not Mean Pro-Conservative

Donald Trump will change everything. This seems to be the consensus among anti-establishment Republicans. … Read More.

20 Jan 2016
Donald Trump and the Cult of Personality

"Power," Henry Kissinger once told The New York Times, "is the ultimate aphrodisiac." Kissinger might amend … Read More.

Will Tyranny Ever Come to America?


Last week, President Obama traveled to Ohio to speak at the Ohio State University commencement. There, he trotted out his new favorite line of attack against Second Amendment advocates: He said it is unpatriotic to believe in the possibility of government tyranny. Why? According to Obama, the Founding Fathers created our government. The American dream and American government are one and the same. By definition then, believing in the possibility of government tyranny means opposing the Founding Fathers and the American dream.

Here's how Obama expressed this nasty notion. He said that the Founders left us "the keys to a system of self-government, the tools to do big things and important things together that we could not possibly do alone ... To conquer fascism and disease; to visit the Moon and Mars; to gradually secure our God-given rights for all our citizens, regardless of who they are, or what they look like, or who they love."

Government, in Obama's view, is the great guarantor of rights. Never mind that government — yes, government in America — has routinely stripped its citizens of rights. Never mind that state governments stripped black people of their basic personhood for decades, enshrining slavery with the help of the federal government. Never mind that for a century after slavery, state governments, with the silent assent of the federal government, enshrined Jim Crow. Never mind that the federal government stripped thousands of Japanese citizens of their rights during World War II and the unborn of their rights in 1973.

None of that matters to Obama. He said, "This country cannot accomplish great things if we pursue nothing greater than our own individual ambition."

The Founders believed, to the contrary, that government's job was to protect our most basic rights so that we could pursue the individual dreams and ambitions that truly make America great — the dreams and ambitions that created Edison and Ford, Jobs and Gates.

But collective action is the necessary precondition for greater rights, says Obama. Therefore, standing up to government means standing for tyranny itself. Said Obama, "Unfortunately, you've grown up hearing voices that incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity that's at the root of all our problems; some of these same voices also doing their best to gum up the works.

They'll warn that tyranny is always lurking just around the corner. You should reject these voices. Because what they suggest is that our brave and creative and unique experiment in self-rule is somehow just a sham with which we can't be trusted."

But it is Obama who has said that the people cannot be trusted with self-rule of the most basic sort. We cannot be trusted to handle our own health insurance. We cannot be trusted to vote correctly on issues like same-sex marriage (his administration has tried to overrule the people of California on the issue). We cannot be trusted to educate our children, or to hire our workers, or to own weapons to protect ourselves, or even to feed ourselves. Administrative government — Obama-esque government, in which the American people speak out once every few years, then recede into subjugation — represents Obama's version of "self-rule."

Obama's rhetoric here is more than perverse — it is supremely dangerous. American rights cannot be removed by a limited government. They can be, and have been, removed by a government actively seeking to remove rights. The Founders knew that. That's why the system they set up was designed to check interest against interest, to prevent consolidation of power in any one branch or any one person. The Founders were skeptical of government and feared government tyranny. That's why they rebelled against the British crown. And that is why the system of checks and balances they created — a system that has gradually been overthrown and replaced by leftists from Woodrow Wilson to Obama — was designed to stop such tyranny through complexity and balance.

A people that does not fear government oppression is not a free people. It is a subject people. A people that believes that the government somehow invariably guards rights is not an American people — it is a Rousseauian rabble prepared to accept the yoke of tyranny. God gave us rights. The Founders gave us a messy system of government to allow the government to protect those rights while preventing the government from usurping them. Worshipping government achieves neither of those purposes.

Ben Shapiro, 29, is a graduate of UCLA and Harvard Law School, a radio host on KRLA 870 Los Angeles, and Editor-At-Large for Breitbart News. He is the New York Times bestselling author of "Bullies: How the Left's Culture of Fear and Intimidation Silences America." To find out more about Ben Shapiro and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at



2 Comments | Post Comment
The south could not be trusted to vote in or even enforce racial integration, Shapiro. You may not be aware the federal government had to send in the troops... Apparently you would have objected to that too. But you weren't even a fetus back then in the 60's. Just a bunch of unformed DNA waiting to bloom into an ignorant, forgetful flower.

The reason we have a constitution and a bill of rights is because the voters can't always be trusted. Neither can mobs.

If you want a lesson in how voters can really get shafted, re-read that excrescence on the face of American jurisprudence, Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98. Or perhaps you didn't care enough to read it in the first place. That was an affront to voters all over the entire planet.

What the hell were you doing at Harvard all that time? Playing ping pong?
Comment: #1
Posted by: Masako
Sat May 11, 2013 5:19 PM
And if the government would not have sent in troops, would the South still be a bunch of rasists? There is no concrete answer, but I would say no. Public opinion would have changed. Perhaps not as fast as some people would have liked, but eventually. Look at how accpeting our culture is today. Rasicts are few and quickly scorned. Gay people are accepted in every area of life. Sure there are a few bad apples here and there, but society as a whole has moved on. Not because the government strong-armed them, but because society moves forward. Voters and mobs can't always be trusted, but neither can government. Obamas speech was appaling and the total opposite of American's founding principles. We absolutly have to be afraid of government. Especially one who just purchased one billion rounds of hollow point ammuntion for a department that is set up to police our soil.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Chris McCoy
Mon May 13, 2013 9:34 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right: comments policy
Ben Shapiro
Feb. `16
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
31 1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 1 2 3 4 5
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 8 Feb 2016
Newspaper ContributorsUpdated 8 Feb 2016
Deb Saunders
Debra J. SaundersUpdated 7 Feb 2016

13 May 2009 If You Disagree With Obama, Are You Anti-American?

1 Aug 2012 The Democratic Party Fascists Take Over

13 Jan 2015 Charlie Hebdo Lost