Robert’s Blog

On this past July 4^th weekend, I heard the hymn, America the Beautiful.  One stanza has always struck me:

America! America!

God mend thine ev’ry flaw

Confirm thy soul in self-control

Thy liberty in law.

 “Self-control”? “Liberty in law”? There is a lot here that seems strange. How can liberty be found in law? Doesn’t law restrict or forbid action which, if we had liberty, we would otherwise be free to do? So much of our law, today, takes away our liberty.  And what about “self control”? Are we to impose restrictions on ourselves, so that we do not exercise our liberty, instead of passing a law? None of this makes sense.  But, the author must have had something in mind.

In present days, law, be it a statute, ordinance, regulation or case law, is seen as a method of changing the way people act. Tax regulations are enacted to “discourage” citizens from doing things which the government does not what them to do. Town ordinances are passed to require neighbors to conform to what the town council believes a home and property should appear. Some appellate courts use their authority to interpret laws to bend private actions to conform to its sense of fairness.  States seize private property in the name of the “public good”, and make no effort to compensate the owners.  The Federal government takes control of private corporations, ignoring shareholders and investors, and, perhaps, even disregarding the Contracts Clause of the Constitution.  Today, law is a negative force.  It is almost unpredictable and seems to change with the whim of whomever is in power or whatever the Conventional Wisdom is of the time.

A preacher once told me, “In Hell, there is nothing but law”.  It is one of my favorite quotes, and it must be true.  Once a law is enacted, a law begs for additional laws to support it, or to amend it.  Unintended consequences, which arise from any new law, require further modification, begetting additional laws and agency regulations.  Then, there are the court cases which further amend the laws, perhaps requiring even more laws and regulations.  Soon, as some have already argued, ordinary people become nothing more than marionettes to the passions of the group in power at a particular moment in time.

Could it be that law was once empowering? Perhaps, the reference to law and liberty, contained in the stanza of America the Beautiful, goes back to the understanding of a generation or more, before us. There seems to have been some wisdom about law, from prior generations, which we have either forgotten or rejected.  I came across this quote from John Adams:

“We have no government armed in power capable of contending with

human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our Constitution

was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate

for the government of another.” 

We, as citizens, must exercise self control.  There used to be boundaries over which one would not cross.  Government power is limited.  The more we can work out ourselves, the more tolerant we are of our fellow citizens, the less law there will be; the more freedom we will have.

 The purpose of the Constitution, and its subordinate law, is to set limits on government operations, and to preserve as much decision making power for the people, alone, to exercise.  Indeed, the Tenth Amendment specifically states that all other powers, not listed in the Constitution, are left to the states or to the people. The various State constitutions are identical in this purpose.  This is what is meant by  “liberty in law”.  Law was to be the foundation of our liberty, our freedom.  Law was  to be unshakable in limiting the power of government, and recognizing the power vested to the people.  This principle was not something which could be changed with time; if it was, the very foundation of American principles of self government would perish and the law would become an unending, hellish mess, constantly growing, burdening the people, and eventually being used by the government to make war against its own people.

What John Adams was stating is that the Founders gave us a government limited in its power.

Power is vested in the people.  But, it necessarily follows that this arrangement can be destroyed by the people, themselves, if they become too emotional, too demanding, or fail to have an understanding of their responsibility under this plan of government.  Instead, the people will empower the government to do things which their community once performed.

 In previous generations, people worked for what had to be done, themselves, because they had a shared sense of morality, often given to them by religion. These beliefs required action by the community. They also had a sense of self-control, a code of conduct which all agreed would be followed.  It was stable and predictable, and it did not change with the whim of Conventional Wisdom or fashion. There was no need for much of the law because people exercised self control; they had a sense of “that wouldn’t be right” or “I couldn?t do that…”  Words like “courtesy” and “empathy” were in the forefront of people’s minds, and those who did not conform felt the community’s disapproval.

But, as Adams warned, If the people pulled back from a shared sense of moral standards and religion, and  involvement in the community, which such standards required, the government would step in and act to resolve the issues. Thereafter, the limited form of government provided by the Founders could not stand. Once the Pandora?s Box of reliance on government action was opened, there could be no end to it.  Law would then become a negative force, controlling the actions of the people.  In turn, the people would necessarily lose the freedom originally intended for them.

We are well along the path to hell on earth.