In the fourth part of the uncommon knowledge interview with Paul Rahe they start to discuss what has gone wrong with the dynamic American form of government that Tocqueville witnessed. Essentially Tocqueville was impressed with the way that the American system empowered citizens with control over their own lives. This was accomplished via the institutions of local government, civic institutions, religion and family. The story in America in the late 19th and 20th centuries has been how the federal government has slowly but surely usurped and undermined these institutions, primarily through the use of grants and mandates.

One of his favorite examples is that of the Buckley amendment. Buckley was a New York, Libertarian (!) senator who had long held a grudge that his collage alma matter had sent his (presumably poor) grades home to his parents. He therefore inserted into a federal spending bill that any collage that accepts federal money MUST respect students privacy. Therefore in his case young Buckley would have not had to suffer the embarrassment of his parents learning about his grades.

Rahe then tells the story from his own experience of a student who attended his first class and did not attend again for some time. He looked into this and learned this student had become a binge drinker at a Frat house. As he teaches at Hillsdale Collage (the only collage that doesn’t accept federal money of any kind) he was able to inform the students parents of this. However if Hillsdale had accepted federal money he would not have been able to do this due to the Buckley amendment.

Which makes more sense? Allowing adults to make decisions that directly effect their jobs and situations in which they are intimately familiar or allowing a distant Washington to make those decisions in advance? Which is more likely to create self reliant citizens as opposed to subjects? To Tocqueville and Rahe the answer is obvious. The more control a citizen has over himself and the institutions which with he deals with everyday the better. Centralizing this power at the Federal level will always weaken these institutions.

At the beginning of his talk he briefly mentions how progressives started to take over the university system in the 1880’s. This started to move the emphasis from individual rights towards more of a collective good model represented by the civil service. This is apparently based on the German model. I am curious as to how and why he thinks this occurred.

Another big moment in America’s slide into soft despotism is the adoption of the 16th and 17th amendments. The 16th amendment allowed for the creation of the income tax which allowed the government to take in as much money as it wanted to. This is true although I suspect the creation of the federal reserve system and national money is actually far more important than this. When you allow the government to print as much money as it wants, what do you expect?

The 17th amendment allowed for senators to be elected. To Rahe this is significant as when the senators were appointed by state legislators it gave the states a powerful voice at the federal level. When they became elected it becomes much easier for the federal government to influence them against their states interests.

In part 3 of the Uncommon Knowledge interview with Paul Rahe Peter Robinson and Paul Rahe explore the 4 characteristics of American culture that tend to protect it from the slide into  soft despotism. These are:

Local Government – Local government is accessible. If you want something done or change there is a possibility of getting it done at the local level. In the early American Republic if you wanted to build a school, road or hospital you did it locally. The distant federal government didn’t do very much. This gives people a feeling of power and control over their own lives and surroundings. This helps fight the feeling of helplessness and ankiatude (there’s that word again, which I am spelling wrong) that can bedevil free republics.

Civic Association – Unlike France, American’s did things through private associations. Like local government this gives people power over their own lives (not to mention that it is most likely much more effective)

Religion – Americans in Tocqueville’s time were shockingly religious, unlike France. Religion puts a certain responsibility on the individual that you are the master of your own soul. This provides a sense of dignity as well as areas of your life which you will not allow anyone to encroach upon.

Family – During this time the French family was not in great shape. Adultery was common. This was not the case in America. The women were strong minded and kept the men inline.

It seems to me that the stronger the central government gets the more it weakens all 4 of these institutions. You have seen this throughout the western world to varying degrees and America is far from untouched.

Take Religion, for example. If the government already has a substantial control over your life why pray to God? If government is already promising you everything you need doesn’t it tend to “Crowd God Out”? Is it any wonder than in the advanced welfare states of Europe (not to mention Canada) that religion is dying?

Same thing with Family. What are the ties that bind? If the government promises to take care of you in your old age via social security, why have kids? Is this not the driving factor behind the falling birth rates in most western nations?

In part 2 of soft despotism with Paul Rahe he attempts to explain the appeal of soft despotism for the ruling class as well as the citizens.

For the ruling class he points out that we all have a natural bias in our minds that we know better than other people. The more educated one becomes, the more this bias is intensified. The desire to rule other people lives, for their benefit, of course, is a strong one.

For citizens the appeal derives from the anxiety of freedom. Rahe uses the term “Ankitude” (which I’m probably spelling wrong) to describe a feeling of fear, of not knowing what to do, which can effect people in free societies. Rahe points to the examples of college seniors who can become gripped with fear in their senior years. For their entire lives they’ve been on an academic track. Now what do they do? What are they going to do with the rest of their lives? What good is their communications degree anyway?

Peter Robinson, further exploring this point, tells the story of Russians experiencing life in America for the first time. The sight of so many choices in a supermarket could be literally overwhelming.

From my perspective Rahe’s point of having an educated, governing class that wants power to help others as they do not know enough to run their own lives is interesting. However I don’t feel it is the full story. Although some with a progressive mindset may be motivated by this it is also a way to greater political power, economic power, and therefore status within a society.

For example take the individual who spends a great deal of time getting a degree in philosophy. He feels he’s important, that he knows a lot. Yet in a free society a high school dropout can invent the sticky note and make millions. How does the philosophy major feel? He can try and invent something useful too but that’s not what philosophy majors are good at. Rather he might stumble into government and create rules to govern the sticky note guy. With the power to pass laws he becomes an important person. He is now “above” the sticky note guy. However he doesn’t actually contribute anything to society.

An example of this might be someone like Al Gore. I know he sits on several boards, including Apple. What does he actually do? I know he invented the internet, but is he actually involved in creating new products at Apple? Rather it is probably useful for Apple to have someone like Gore on board if he needs to get something done as Gore with his connections can get things through the bureaucracy.

Another interesting thing Rahe mentions is the fear that grips collage seniors when their schooling is almost up. Isn’t this a condemnation somewhat of the entire educational process? Throughout a students life the one thing he learns is how to follow orders. You’re told what to study, when to study, and then graded on what you’ve done as to whether it’s any good or not. You DO NOT LEARN TO THINK FOR YOURSELF. YOU DO NOT LEARN TO FOLLOW YOUR OWN PASSIONS. In this way cannot compulsory schooling, as it does not prepare people to be free thinking citizens, be considered an enemy of republican virtue’s? How much formal education did the founding fathers have anyway?

Below is an interesting video which talks about education and how the system really only trains people to become professors.

I’m also a little puzzled as to why Rahe thinks people don’t want to live under a nanny. If you can enjoy all the freedoms of adulthood without the responsibilities, who isn’t going to go for that? For the individual and society this ultimately turns out to be a Siren’s call. However I don’t think it’s surprising that the original song sounds so sweet.

First of all I want to say that from now on I’m planning on blogging nearly everyday about my film making journey. I’ve been busy working on other projects but now I  think I can devote my full attention to my film project. It’s going to need it.

In order to make my film I figure I’m going to need three things:

• Interviews and stories from average Americans
• Interviews with noted Authors and Experts
• As much free imagery and video as I can get from government agencies / companies etc.

The first two I’m not so concerned about. When I set up interviews with people like Angelo Codevilla I’m planning on going to them. From there I’ll do man on the street interviews to get the average Americans thoughts. However now that I think about it if I could set up interviews with people who have a real “American Dream” type story that would be great too. Hopefully my social networking plan will allow me to reveal such people in time.

Getting free imagery / video is going to be critical. However all  government agencies, not to mention tourism bureau’s etc have royalty free images and video that I could potentially use. Big corporations like GE, Microsoft, GM etc should also have free stuff I could use to help me construct my film. One aspect I am going to want to stress is American innovation. Having images of cars flowing off the assembly line or Microsoft computers should really help this. Tomorrow this is going to be my main goal.

I actually got this idea from Phelim McAleer who made the documentary “Not Evil Just Wrong”. I was actually lucky enough to meet him when he premiered his movie in Vancouver. I’ll have more to say on this in the future.

Currently I’m actually writing an outline for my movie which I’m hoping will save me a lot of time down the rode. I’m also reading Paul Rahe’s book “Soft Despotism – Democracies Drift”. I know that Peter Robinson is going to be interviewing Professor Rahe on Uncommon Knowledge this week, so I’ll definitely be tuning in for that.

I know this post has been a bit of a mish mash of ideas. Future posts should be much more focused. Right now my mind is just whirling with possibilities and things I need to do. One step at a time.