Why will the gas run out? Think of where it comes from, Monique. Think about what’s going to happen there now that the evil global overlord is no longer around to oppress everyone into behaving themselves. Think about what’s going to happen to the evil world financial system now that the planet’s greatest debtor nation has winked out of existence and won’t be meeting its loan repayments to anyone. Think about what happens when you take the lid of Pandora’s box and everything that we forgot about history comes spilling out to bite you in the ass. Do you know how unusual it is, in human history, for children to grow up in a place like this?” She waved her hands around to take in the city. “Never knowing the fear of someone riding over the horizon to steal their family’s crops and burn their fucking hut to the ground? All as a prelude to snatching them up as slaves for the rest of their miserable fucking lives? That’s normality, baby. That’s life as it has been lived by most human beings through most of our history. That’s what I’ve been fighting my entire adult life, variations on that theme. That’s what America protected you from. And now she’s gone. And you are all alone in the world. Except for me.”

The above is a quote from one of the characters in John Birmingham’s “Without Warning“. The novel begins just before the start of the second Gulf War with the appearance of something called “The Wave”. The Wave is an energy field of some kind that essentially wipes out most of America (not to mention Canada and Mexico, although Vancouver makes it, yeah!) in an instant. A lot of people cheer the end of the Great Satan and it’s Pax Americana. However soon they learn that a world without America is a much more dangerous and barbarous place, and that there were many things people simply took for granted. Do you really  want America to fail? Do you really want America to become “just another nation”? Be careful what you ask for, this novel warns, you might just get it (and it might not be what you expected at all).

Although I felt the novel dragged a little towards the end overall I really enjoyed it. Below is a link to an interview done with the author. It’s worth checking out:

Without Warning Interview

In my effort to further understand where America is and where it is going I’ve been reading Paul A. Rahe’ “Soft Despotism – Democracy’s Drift”. I’m finding it a tough read so far but worth it. Below is Part 1 of an interview that Peter Robinson did with Paul Rahe for the “Uncommon Knowledge” program. Below is the video for part 1 and my thoughts are below.

After talking about health care for a bit he talks about Montesquieu who saw governance in terms of three models:

Monarchies – Are ruled by Kings but are typically limited in power, usually by the nobility. They are driven my honor.
Despotisms – Are ruled by despots who wield unlimited power and are driven by  terror
Republics – Equality is assumed. Ruled by citizen legislators and driven by virtue.

Montesquieu is quite taken with the English method of governance, which he calls “The Beautiful System”. He sees it as being beautiful as it contains a class of people, english merchants, whose well being is not dependent on the governing class. When the government becomes corrupt it is possible for this class to “throw the bums out”, if you will.

Tocqueville, writing 100 years later, sees the same virtuous system taking root in the young American Republic. However he is observing America in the aftermath of the French Revolution which he sees as a watershed. Equality is now firmly operating as a principle in America. Given this Tocqueville sees little chance of a true, authoritarian Despotism taking hold here. As this is the case what problems might occur?

This is where the idea of “Soft Despotism” comes in. In America it is impossible for a despot to gain power through terror, as was traditionally done. However it is possible for a despot to gain power through offering to help people. Slowly, slyly, overtime the despot (which will not be a single person, but a governing class) can gain power. The offers of help always come with strings attached.

The idea of virtue being a defining yet difficult characteristic to achieve aspect of Republics is an idea echoed in Codevilla’s “Character of Nations”. Virtue is the idea that you are willing to sacrifice your own personal gain for the good of the Republic. Translated to the real world this means that you do not join the governing class to get rich or even as a vocation. You do it out of a sense of obligation to serve your country. In most countries, to one degree or another, this is not the case. Wealth is not gained by producing, but by controlling other men. As soft despotism seeps into the bones of the body politic more and more people seek to use the power of government to get ahead. Not only does this imperil the prosperity of the country but it will slowly destroy the characteristic of virtue which is necessary to sustain the republic. The fact that America has acquired a permanent governing class (see senators and congressmen, but also the bureaucracy, who make those roles their lives) tells me that America’s slide to soft despotism is already quite acute.

On another note. Paul Rahe has written a bit about the Obama administration at PowerLine. Check it out here:

http://ow.ly/IGT9

Chapter 6 of Angelo Codevilla’s “The Character Of Nations” is entitled Civility. By “Civility” he doesn’t mean politeness.  Rather he discusses what qualities it takes to be a citizen and what kinds of civic qualities different kinds of regimes encourage.

To Codevilla, a civil society made up of citizens is one in which the rulers are bound by the same rules as the ruled. This is why taking an oath of office is so symbolically important in western countries. When a ruler is sworn in he is subjecting himself or herself to a greater power. Citizens must have clearly defined rights which the rulers must respect. The most important of these is property rights, meaning that you have a right to your own life, the fruits of your own labour and that these cannot be arbitrarily taken from you. People who enjoy such liberties have a long term stake in society and tend to take a propriety interest in their surroundings. These reinforce the habits of virtue and freedom which support the rule of law and are the bulwark of civil society. Citizenship means the possibility of ruling as well as being ruled. It means being able to participate in decisions both large and small that may affect your own life.

To Codevilla true citizenship is largely a pretense in the modern world. Rather than being citizens, most people are content to be subjects. They are happy to live their lives as consumers of government services. Merely being able to vote in different rulers who promise to dispense the goodies is not an act of citizenship.

Codevilla mentions de Tocqueville’s “Democracy in America“. De Tocqueville wrote this book in an effort to contrast the faux citizenship engendered by the French Revolution vs the real thing in America. The question is I suppose is if America is remaining true to it’s roots of true citizenship or is it falling for the siren’s call of the subject. Something to think about.

Chapter 5 of Angelo M. Codevilla’s “The Character Of Nations” deals with prosperity, or more specifically how a regimes policies can combine with the character of a people to generate prosperity. How does this chapter relate to the American experience?

America is undoubtably a prosperous country. Depending on how you measure it it may be the richest country the world has ever seen. The reason it has achieved this level of prosperity is that past American regimes have encouraged its citizens to be productive as a means of getting ahead as opposed to seeking political favors. This has been one of the secrets of the success that defines most of the Anglosphere with America being the shining example.

This fact seems so simple yet it is one that most political economists ignore. The holy grail for most political economists, as Codevilla points out, is to find a system that somehow merges free markets with some kind of planning – with them doing the planning. (I remember reading a recent article by Thomas Friedman explaining the benefits of China style government). It strikes me that many elites possess a certain intellectual arrogance. They’re just so sure they’re right that they feel they must be given control in some regards. The results have not been encouraging.

There are many examples of elites not understanding the lessons of the American model which is why they keep falling into the “planning” trap. Here’s one. During the 1960’s the World Bank promoted guidelines that were supposed to help 3rd world countries become 1st world. The plan was to use foreign aid to strengthen and centralize government, build roads, dams, steel mills and infrastructure, use taxation to reform and change patterns, raise tariffs to benefit industries and encourage secularization and liberal attitudes. The results of the above was disaster. Due to these policies It became far easier to gain benefits via government largess than to actually work for anything.  Political leaders and others who were well connected would drive around in Mercedes while their countrymen lived in worsening squalor.

The reason that all of the planning on foreign aid failed is that it encouraged and put in power people who sole skill was doling out political favors. Getting ahead by being productive was always the worst option. If you were smart it made much more sense to put your effort into becoming a “gatekeeper” of the regime and doling out favors while skimming off the top.

In the rest of the chapter Codevilla looks at other countries and how their systems deal with prosperity. Here is brief overview:

Japan – For a time in the late 1990’s Japan was the darling of political economists as it seemed to combine free markets with planning. I remember reading an article by James Fallows in The Atlantic praising Japan and the economist Friedrich List as being the model to follow as opposed to America/Great Britain and Adam Smith. Of course then the 90’s happened and Japan fell into a funk from which it hasn’t really recovered.

What is interesting about Japan is that although it is a rich country its people are not really prosperous. They are able to produce 1st world products yet most live in almost 3rd world conditions. For example, in Japan only 3 in 10 homes have central heating. The reasons for this is that with all of the planning being done it encourages exports but discourages imports. It is often cheaper to buy Japanese products abroad than it is at home. The Japanese regime protects many favored and politically connected sectors of the economy at the expense of the nation as a whole. Therefore Japanese are forced to pay $1 for a strawberry or $7 for a bag of rice. Far above world prices. What is interesting is that the Japanese put up with this and in fact see it as their role. In Japan, as I suspect in most of Asia, you are an organ in an organism. If it’s your role to work in a factory and be forced to pay $7 for a bag of rice, that’s the way it is.

With all of the political trade-offs and competing economic interests it has made it very difficult for the Japanese regime to change course when it needs to. This is something that Japan struggles with to this day.

China – China is the latest contender for the role of economic world leader. The Chinese regime has managed to achieve its growth rates by allowing limited private property and encouraging it’s citizens to “jump into the sea” of entrepreneurship. Although China is generating real wealth it still is bedeviled by a parasitic governing class. In China there remain all kinds of political gatekeepers that live at the expense of consumers and producers. For the Chinese you produce if you cannot avoid it, you consume at your peril. Ideally, you want to become a “gatekeeper”. This is not a recipe for success in the long run.

Europe – Europe has an enormous political class that seeps into every aspect of European life. The EU commission has the power to set the standards for everything from the bacteria in cheese to the length of condoms. When such a powerful political regime exists corruption is common as there are constant exchanges of political power for money. This system is coming under increasing pressure as it is forced to deal with the costs of rising pensions and medical care.

Chile – One of the most fascinating examples of regimes and prosperity is that of Chile. It is an example of a regime that uniquely tried to separate political power from economic life, believing that each tends to corrupt the other. I think I’m going to talk about Chile in a future post.

Now, what does all of the above mean for America and American prosperity? I’m thinking the question is to what extent political gatekeepers are becoming more prominent in American Life as opposed to producers. If you want to succeed in America and live a good life are you better off creating something or seeking political favor? At this point I suspect you’re still better off being a producer although I’m concerned which direction this is going.

Related articles by Zemanta

• From Sudan, the Arctic, Shanghai: last takes on obesity (jamesfallows.theatlantic.com)

Currently as I prep for my documentary I am reading a number of books that will hopefully give me some further perspective on America. The book I am currently reading is Angelo Codevilla’s “The Character of Nations”.

“The Character of Nations” looks at how Regimes in countries can effect and change their citizens over time which in turn can vastly change a country. By Regimes Codevilla does not merely mean governments. To him regimes are the government and the establishment that support that government. This can include holy men, entertainers, academia, businessmen and others. One of the best examples of how Regimes can drastically change a country is Germany. If you were born in Germany at the turn of the last century you were born under the Wilhelmine monarchy. This was one of the most orderly and polite environments you could imagine. This then changed into the Weimar Republic with its inflationary anything goes irreverence. The Weimar Republic then gave way to the Nazi’s. Enough said there. From there Germany became the Adenauer republic which was characterized by respectability, family, church and hard money. Today that has given way to a country characterized by sex shops and environmentalism. Without ever leaving home you would have lived in 5 very different countries.

One of the questions I’m going to have to investigate is what are the reason for the relative stability of the American system vs other systems. Any thoughts on this?

Another distinction Codevilla makes is the difference between being a citizen as opposed to a subject. A citizen believes he has rights, freedoms and responsibilities by right rather than at the grace of a regime. A subject on the other hand is little more than an entitled consumer of government services. I suspect America was firmly in the citizen side of this equation for most of its history but I fear this is slipping away. Like most western countries more and more Americans seem to be willing to exchange their freedom for the promise of security.

Which reminds me I think I’m going to have to read Hayek’s “The Road To Serfdom“. I think it could shed some light in this area.

As I think more and more about my topic these are the questions I keep coming back to:

• What qualities make America extraordinary?
• What are some examples of American exceptionalism?
• What do Americans take for granted about America?
• What does the world take for granted about America?
• is America’s character changing? If so how and why is it changing and what is it changing into? What are the consequences of these changes for itself and the world?

If you have any thoughts on these questions please leave a comment. I’m really looking for ideas at this time.

One of the qualities that made America so successful was that under the American system individual success was less dependent on the ruling regime that any other in history. Religion and Family also played huge roles in American civic life which I suspect it somewhat unique. Authority did not come from the government. These other institutions played a huge role. Again, however, is this changing?

Any thoughts you have I would love to hear it. Well, back to reading …

Related articles by Zemanta

• British Think-Tank: U.S. Power Fading (cbsnews.com)