I will be the first to admit to being annoyed by automated phone instructions that direct me to press “one” for English and “two” for Spanish. It is more than a minor inconvenience. It is a matter of principle. If immigrants are to make a meaningful contribution to society they must do a little work before they are given all of society’s benefits. That includes taking the time to learn English. It’s the same logic that was used to put me through a semester of pledging before being admitted to the ranks of the Sigma Chi fraternity in 1986.
But the statist says he does not want American institutions to teach immigrants our language, our history, and our culture. He says he does not want to do so because of his commitment to the religion of moral relativism. He says that to do so would send the wrong message that American culture is somehow better than other cultures.
Of course, the statist is being less than truthful. The very fact that we are flooded with immigrants shows that we are superior to other countries like Mexico. The fact that past nations like East Germany have had to build walls to keep people in, not out, shows they are aware of their inferiority. We don’t need to worry about hurting their collective feelings.
So the statist may as well admit that it is not out of principle – as if moral relativism can, indeed, be principled – that he makes immigration so easy. The reason is one of raw power. He wants more votes in order to advance the statist agenda.
The statist may, from time to time, claim that his stance on immigration is pragmatic rather than principled. This is at best an unprincipled distortion of the truth. He cannot claim that amnesty is a “solution” to the “problem” of filling low wage jobs that poor people will not fill. It is his stance on immigration that drives down wages in the first place. Surely one cannot claim credit for solving the problems he created himself.
It is hardly surprising that the statist mentality leads not just to a desire to erode borders but, also, to a desire to erode our national defense. Those who are unwilling to see our nation as superior are hardly in a position to argue for military superiority. The same mentality that leads to faith in moral relativism leads to faith in the United Nations. But George Washington saw things differently. In 1793, he said the following:
There is a rank due to the United States among nations which will be withheld, if not absolutely lost, by the reputation of weakness. If we desire to avoid insult, we must be able to repel it; if we desire to secure peace, one of the most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known that we are at all times ready for war.
At a time when America is flirting with statist policies, other nations are moving beyond their own borders in search of resources, which, if obtained, could drastically change our standing in the world. Russia is claiming the North Pole as its own in order to obtain more oil. China is making contracts with Latin America in pursuit of the same goal.
Meanwhile, the statist is unconcerned. America is only five percent of the world’s population. But it consumes twenty-five percent of the world’s energy supply. The statist “solution” to the “problem” of such global inequality is to make America poorer.
This statist mentality is so pervasive that it threatens our economy, our national security, and every aspect of our individual liberty. Its advance has been made possible, not just by Democrats, but also by unprincipled Republicans. Herbert Hoover made FDR’s New Deal possible with protectionist policies following the stock market crash of 1929.
George W. Bush has similarly enabled President Obama with his TARP policies of 2008. His statement that he “abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system” will live in infamy. It has secured his place in history as the Republican Jimmy Carter – a president so inept that he took down an entire party for a whole generation.
But thank God groups like the Young America’s Foundation and the Leadership Institute are working to produce a new generation of conservatives who will help rebuild this nation based on conservative principles. And thank God Mark Levin has written Liberty and Tyranny to show them just how to do it.
I believe Mark Levin is correct in asserting that we must limit the Supreme Court’s judicial review power. We must do so by establishing legislative veto power over Court decisions with a supermajority vote of both houses of Congress. That would be more in line with the Framers intent than the status quo.
I believe Mark Levin is also right in asserting that we must end the monopoly of government education by applying anti-trust laws to the National Education Association. We must do the same for the American Federation of Teachers.
Whatever we do, we must act soon. For, it was Ronald Reagan who warned us: “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our grandchildren what it was once like in the United States where men were free.”
Source: Mark Levin (2009) Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member