creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Thomas Sowell
Thomas Sowell
22 May 2012
A Book for Republicans

Democrats have been having a field day with the cry of "tax cuts for the rich" — for which … Read More.

22 May 2012
Big Lies in Politics

The fact that so many successful politicians are such shameless liars is not only a reflection on them, it is … Read More.

18 May 2012
A Racial Revolution?

Now that census data show — for the first time in American history — the number of white babies … Read More.

Is Democracy Viable?

Share Comment

The media have recently been so preoccupied with a Congressman's photograph of himself in his underwear that there has been scant attention paid to the fact that Iran continues advancing toward creating a nuclear bomb, and nobody is doing anything that is likely to stop them.

Nuclear weapons in the hands of the world's leading sponsor of international terrorism might seem to be something that would sober up even the most giddy members of the chattering class. But that chilling prospect cannot seem to compete for attention with cheap behavior by an immature Congressman, infatuated with himself.

A society that cannot or will not focus on matters of life and death is a society whose survival as a free nation is at least questionable. Hard as it may be to conceive how the kind of world that one has been used to, and taken for granted, can come to an end, it can happen in the lifetime of today's generation.

Those who founded the United States of America were keenly aware that they were making a radical departure in the kinds of governments under which human beings had lived over the centuries — and that its success was by no means guaranteed. Monarchies in Europe had lasted for centuries and the Chinese dynasties for thousands of years. But a democratic republic was something else.

While the convention that was writing the Constitution of the United States was still in session, a lady asked Benjamin Franklin what the delegation was creating. "A republic, madam," he said, "if you can keep it."

In the middle of the next century, Abraham Lincoln still posed it as a question whether "government of the people, by the people and for the people shall not perish from the earth." Years earlier, Lincoln had warned of the dangers to a free society from its own designing power-seekers — and how only the vigilance, wisdom and dedication of the public could preserve their freedom.

But, today, few people seem to see such dangers, either internally or internationally.

A recent poll showed that nearly half the American public believes that the government should redistribute wealth.

That so many people are so willing to blithely put such an enormous and dangerous arbitrary power in the hands of politicians — risking their own freedom, in hopes of getting what someone else has — is a painful sign of how far many citizens and voters fall short of what is needed to preserve a democratic republic.

The ease with which people with wealth can ship it overseas electronically, or put it in tax shelters at home, means that raising the tax rate on wealthy people is not going to bring in the kind of tax revenue that would enable wealth redistribution to provide the bonanza that some people are expecting.

In other words, people who are willing to give government more arbitrary power can give up their birthright of freedom without even getting the mess of pottage. Worse yet, they can give up their children's and their grandchildren's birthright of freedom.

Free and democratic societies have existed for a relatively short time, as history is measured — and their staying power has always been open to question. So much depends on the wisdom of the voters that the franchise was always limited, in one way or another, so that voting would be confined to those with a stake in the viability and progress of the country, and the knowledge to cast their vote intelligently.

In our own times, however, voting has been seen as just one of the many "rights" to which everyone is supposed to be entitled. The emphasis has been on the voter, rather than on the momentous consequences of elections for the nation today and for generations yet unborn.

To those who see voting as more or less just a matter of self-expression, almost a recreational activity, there is no need to inform themselves on both sides of the issues before voting, much less sit down and think beyond the rhetoric to the realities that the rhetoric conceals.

Careless voters may be easily swayed by charisma and rhetoric, oblivious to the monumental disasters created around the world by 20th century leaders with charisma and rhetoric, such as Hitler.

Voters like this represent a danger of terminal frivolity for freedom and democracy.

To find out more about Thomas Sowell and read features by other Creators Syndicate columnists and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com. Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305. His website is www.tsowell.com.

COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM


Comments

3 Comments | Post Comment
Interesting that Lincoln is always referred to as one of this nation's greatest exponents of liberty through the continuation of the United States as it stood in 1860. Few presidents did more to desecrate the Constitution, shred the Bill of Rights, and use the power of the central government to destroy and ravage a section of its own people.
To claim that he did so to "free a people" is to ignore Lincoln's own words and those of his military advisers. Many of his military powers executed in the pursuit of the destruction of the South and the transfer of its wealth to his political
benefactors, were used as a template by megalomaniacs in Western Europe in the next century. It is my contention that liberty, self-determination and individual self-expression was in no way served by the consolidation and centralization of power which was expanded by Lincoln. As for the issue of slavery, the institution would have died a rather quick death once the technology that was on the cusp of being developed, was applied over the next 30 years.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Graham B. Patterson
Mon Jun 27, 2011 10:13 PM
THE PROBLEMS FACED BY AMERICA TODAY ARE, WITHOUT QUESTION, THE DARKEST SINCE 1860, THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR. IN ALL PAST CONFLICTS WE WERE FACED WITH THE SIMPLE, BUT PAINFUL EQUATION OF MORTAL COMBAT: "THE FUSTESS WITH THE MOSTESS." THIS ANCIENT ANSWER TO OUR REPUBLIC'S SURVIVAL AND MILITARY DEFENSE IS BECOMING AS ANACHRONISTIC AS WARFARE IN BIRCH BARK CANOES. WE LIVE IN A WORLD WHERE AT LEAST NINE NATIONS, INCLUDING THE USA, HAVE ATOMIC WARFARE CAPABILITIES, AND TWO MORE ARE ATTEMPTING TO JOIN THIS "ELITE" GROUP. DO WE REALLY THINK THAT WITH ELEVEN COUNTRIES HAVING THE ABILITY OF VAPORIZING MILLIONS IN SECONDS--AND WHEN MANY OF THESE NATIONS HATE OTHERS WITH AN INEXHAUSTIBLE HATE, THAT IT'S POSSIBLE TO AVOID CARNAGE PREVIOUSLY UNKNOWN?

AND WHILE THIS NUCLEAR SWORD OF DAMOCLES HANGS OVER US AND MOST OF THE OTHER WORLD-- WE HAVE A MAN IN OUR HIGHEST SEAT OF GOVERNMENT WHO IS FAR MORE INTERESTED IN THE APPLAUSE OF WORLD RADICALS THAN HAVING THE APPROVAL OF OUR CITIZENS. MANY SAY OUR PRESIDENT IS SIMPLY NOT PREDICTABLE. THIS IS DEMONSTRABLY NOT SO: HE IS FOR ANY THING THAT INCREASES THE ASTRONOMICAL DEBT OF OUR REPUBLIC-- EVEN IF HIS EXTREME LEFTISTS ARE ANGERED BY HIS ACTIONS. MORE THAN A SIMPLE MARXIST, MR. OBAMA HAS TOLD US AND THE WORLD THAT AS FAR AS AMERICA IS CONCERNED HE IS A DESTRUCTIONIST. READ HIS BOOKS.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Beth Harbin
Wed Jun 29, 2011 11:53 AM
Why is it that Radical Muslim Terrorism is being shadowed and covered over by Political Correctness. Do you Mr Sowell think this a dangerous thing to use in such a dangerous envirenment? Shouldn't we call terrorism for what it is terrorism? What you cover up now usually explodes in your face later. We cannot negotiate with peoplle that do not show negotiation in their playbook. Only if they win and you lose would they consider talking. They are allowed to lie also if it is to their benefit in the end result. This a no win situation and why does not the top down in Washington see this or do they not want to see this? Mr Sowell,please write because your writing is extremely prolific. Thankss A concerned citizen.
Comment: #3
Posted by: joseph r carreirro sr
Wed Jul 6, 2011 8:04 PM
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:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Thomas Sowell
May. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 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 30 31 1 2
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
Author’s Podcast
Roland Martin
Roland S. MartinUpdated 20 Jun 2012
Marc Dion
Marc DionUpdated 28 May 2012
Steve Chapman
Steve ChapmanUpdated 27 May 2012

3 Nov 2009 The "Costs" of Medical Care: Part IV

9 Mar 2010 Artificial Stupidity

3 Nov 2009 The "Costs" of Medical Care