The greatest American generation, without a doubt, is the original – the founding. Many would have us believe the WWII generation deserves that moniker. I disagree. I’ll give them their due in defeating totalitarianism in Europe and Asia, but they helped to install a thugocracy right here in America by expanding the central government at the expense of individual liberty and our federalist system.
They were Progressive Era babies indoctrinated by a political and social movement that eschewed limited government and embraced an administrative state. The American spirit of community, as marveled by Tocqueville, was rendered antiquated and inefficient for the dynamism of a modern age. Progressives believed government at all levels – especially the federal – could address the ills of society more efficiently than ordinary, motivated citizens. Populism and democracy was all the rage. Our founding fathers would have been horrified.
States lost representation in Washington D.C. with the advent of the 17th Amendment. Populism would imbue the upper chamber along with the House of Representatives.
Senators no longer feared censure from their State’s legislature, or a recall. He could act with impunity until Election Day, six years hence. That gives him plenty of time to raise money from special interest groups that don’t necessarily have his State’s best interest in mind.
Populism expanded under the WWII generation. LBJ’s Great Society was implemented to address the plight of the poor. We now know this government initiative is a failure and has devastated the black community. The War on Poverty is the biggest defeat the United States has experienced to date, yet, we still throw trillions of dollars at an age old problem that will never go away.
Populism, once again, was forced upon the States. They lost their constitutional prerogatives when a progressive Supreme Court dictated the makeup of their legislatures. Here is an excerpt from one of my earlier blog post:
One of those considerations was meddling in States’ elections. A series of Supreme Court rulings dating back to the 1960’s subverted the political process by retarding the rights of a State’s self governance. These judges – this priestly class – molested federalism by dictating the manner with which States’ shall choose their senators and representatives. This was by no means a federal consideration. This was purely local.
The rulings in question are Baker v. Carr, Reynolds v. Sims, and Wesberry v. Sanders. The Supreme Court fundamentally changed the legislature of States by dictating their districts and how they were to be represented. Basically, rural citizens were to be dominated by urbanites. Degenerate values that breed on city streets would emanate from state capitols and spread throughout the countryside.
More importantly, this reconfiguration would benefit a political party that advocates centralized government. Having Democrats dominate state legislatures, they would draw districts that marginalize hard working, liberty loving citizens while packing federal congressional districts with teat squawkers, who are looking for an agent that would steal from his neighbors
Populism has gained more ground and is now a threat to the republic. Progressives no longer value citizenship. They advocate for the rights of illegal aliens at the expense of their constituents. Hell, some of them want to grant these invaders the right to vote. Congressmen, such as Luis Gutierrez, openly declare their allegiance to foreigners who have no regard for American sovereignty, laws, or citizens.
How can a congressman get away with this flagrant hostility to the American creed? The answer is the Census has configured illegal alien diasporas into a State’s population. Congressional districts are then forged to cater to these people. They have just as much representation in the halls of Congress as an American. Here is an excerpt from The Center for Immigration Studies:
This hearing is going to discuss one of the most often overlooked, but nonetheless important, effects they have: on political representation. If you take nothing else away from my testimony, it should be that allowing in people, even as guest workers or just tolerating illegal immigration, has board ranging effects. These effects include such things as the redistribution of House seats. For example, if we take the 11 million illegals already here and grant them temporary status, the Census in 2010 will still count them, and seats will still be apportioned to states based on their presence. On the other hand, if we enforce the law and make most illegals go home, this too will have apportionment consequences in 2010. In our discussion of immigration, therefore, we should not compartmentalize its various impacts; instead, we must recognize the broad implications of immigration on virtually every aspect of American life, including apportionment.
Populism doesn’t recognize citizenship, nor does it accept the boundaries of a constitutional republic. Populism becomes totalitarianism; it is a killer of democracies.