Do We Know Who We Are Anymore?
- Print print this page
- Discuss Comment, Blog about
Advertisement
When politicians come in front of the television cameras, they’re always referring to the American people. The American people want this, or the American people want that. The American people have clearly said or, we’re listening to the voice of the American people.
For too long, this deference to the American people by politicians has been a sham — little more than political pandering and lip service to our founding ideals and notions about a limited representative government working at the behest of “the people.”
Early on in “Democracy in America,” Alexis de Tocqueville, in explaining the makeup of the people who emigrated from Europe to our shores, wrote that it wasn’t the rich aristocracy that made up the majority of our early English colonies, but a wide representation of middle class. This had a determined effect on the evolution of our sense of liberty and limited government overseen by the people.
“All the English colonies, therefore, at the time of their inception, shared a great kindred spirit,” de Tocqueville wrote. “From the start, they all seemed destined to promote the development of liberty, not the aristocratic liberty of their mother country, but middle-class, democratic liberty, a complete example of which had not been encountered in the history of the world.”
Later, after our founders had made their Declaration of Independence from England, fought a revolution to ensure that independence, and mapped out our Constitution and Bill of Rights, de Tocqueville talked about a unique and new people in the world where “society acts independently for its own advantage” and “all power rests in its hands; almost no-one would imagine or, still less, voice the idea of seeking power elsewhere.”
Until the emergence of the tea party, the November elections, and Congressman Paul Ryan’s gutsy and politically risky follow-through proposals to cut trillions instead of billions from the budget, reform taxes and preserve the Medicare entitlement by preparing it for future viability, one could have argued that de Tocqueville’s description of the American people’s sovereignty and power had long since been relinquished.
We gave it up to a growingly bloated welfare state of an unsustainable government — a government that stands in front of the mike and goes on and on about what they’re doing for the American people while doing nothing, or spending literally billions while they stand there. Ryan’s “Path to Prosperity” is the first time in a long while a politician has put his money where his mouth is. Federally speaking, the last politician to look at the failure of our government, like Ryan is now, was Ronald Reagan.
Why drag poor, over-quoted de Tocqueville into this mess? Because here was a French visitor to America who understood us better then than we do now. He saw in the American character and its government what we have forgotten.
It doesn’t come as any surprise, really, because the best democracies always seem to give in to socialist-styled nanny state governments promising the moon. Entitlements offer ways for people not to show individual initiative or work as hard. Meanwhile, their governments craftily increase power and control, saying they know what the people want.
If the government is shut down by the time you read this, it won’t be because of Republicans, though they’ll probably get the blame. It will be because too many of us no longer understand who we are or how our government is supposed to operate.
We believe the Harry Reids, Nancy Pelosis and Chuck Schumers when they say the tea party has hijacked the GOP and is pushing an “extremist” agenda. We take stock in the unhinged, like the guy on The Pilot’s website who commented about last year’s tea party gathering in Southern Pines, “I ran into this crowd last year at the post office and I was so irritated when I left, I felt like running my car through the crowd while they shouted their angry agenda at everyone that came by.”
Congressman Ryan isn’t pandering to the American people when he stands in front of the television cameras. His budget plans are bold and critical to our nation’s survival. The question is, have we so lost ee Tocqueville’s understanding of who we are that we can’t hear either of them?
Geoff Cutler is owner of Cutler Tree LLC in Southern Pines and is a regular contributor to The Pilot and PineStraw magazine. Contact him at geoffcutler@embarqmail.com.
More like this story
Advertisement
Comments
MikeNC 2 years, 1 month ago
Excellent article with good strong points. Tocqueville, was one cool historian and political thinker and in love with our new democracy. If anything, shall I use the word, "good", has come out of the last 2 1/2 years of the extreme Socialist ideaology of our current President and over half the member of the Democratic Congress, Americans are beginning to wake up and find out all over again, just how unique and indiviual our Country, founded on liberty for all, is. Another great quote by Tocqueville, that I like: Democacy and Socialism have nothing in common, but for one word, Equality. But notice the difference. While Democracy seeks equality in liberty, Socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude. Diane
Ross 2 years, 1 month ago
You need to stick to what you know a little about - cutting trees!
Bflat 2 years, 1 month ago
Ross, I love ya buddy, but keep in mind that articles like these lead to lots of good talking points, clever rhetoric and the ensuing fun. :))
Bflat 2 years, 1 month ago
Ross, I love ya buddy, but keep in mind that articles like these lead to lots of good talking points, clever rhetoric and the ensuing fun. :)) Breaks up the monotony.
Ross 2 years, 1 month ago
Dear mauiman - I have expressed my opinions many times and quite coherently. Perhaps that was why you didn't understand.
I have expressed my thoughts on many things including global warming and gun control.
All you do is complain and blame liberals for all of the worlds problems.
And......if I wasn't such a gentleman - I would call you an ignorant loud mouthed redneck.........but since I am - I won't :)
moonchild7 2 years, 1 month ago
I definately know who I AM but who are you? Are you joking or what? There was NO MIDDLE CLASS when de Tocqueville came here to America in the 1830's! The Industrial Revolution was taking shape and helping to create owners, managers, and factory workers, but there was no middle class. He was "impressed" with the fact that "power was in the hands of the people" unlike in Europe with all of it's Monarchies. The idea of LIBERTY which in it's grandest definition is, "The equality of conditions...in which human beings are able to govern themselves", CANNOT exist in AMERICA now the way those TEAPOTS want because they'll be "STRANGE FRUIT" hanging again from trees, BAREFOOT and PREGNANT women will again become the "NORM" and GAYS and LESBIANS will be back in closets or will be strung up on barbed wire fences dying most horrible deaths. If the TEAPOTS say they don't believe that then they are lying.
Bflat 2 years, 1 month ago
The "American People" have lost sight of who they are because the country is quickly becoming "Post-Industrial." Everything that our forefathers have worked to build up in the last 250 years as great wealth is being squandered. Factories and jobs are moving overseas at an alarming rate. Americans buy or consume everything in sight and produce little in comparison to other countries, though the US used to out produce all other countries in the world combined.
According to the US Census Bureau over 43 million "American People" live in poverty. Welfare programs have not solved problems but have created problems with those who do not want to work lined up with hands out. At the same time, unemployment is increasing at an alarming rate as millions of jobs have gone overseas.
What kind of future will there be for our children if the current trend continues and when will the "American People" wake up and try to do somthing about it? How is this country going to have any kind of economic future as a deindustrialized America? Soon, liberty as we have known it will cease to exist as the Government is taking control of everything while saying the "American People" want this or that.
MikeNC 2 years, 1 month ago
Moonchild, who do you think got off the boats? A bunch of Kings and Queens? Diane
moonchild7 2 years, 1 month ago
The poor, traders, merchants, and indentured servants. Doesn't quite look like the MIDDLE CLASS to me. Paul Ryan's so-called "BUDGET" will take us back to the 19th Century but then again, that's where the teapots want to be.
Darkwing 2 years, 1 month ago
Merchants, traders, and artisans made up the middle class since the medieval ages, MC7. We had a middle class in America. Read a bit more than Huffpost.
JimHeim 2 years, 1 month ago
How do you define the middle class in a culture where about 0.5% were rich, 1.5% got along okay providing services to them and the other 98% lived in or near poverty? Do you really think a single wager earner in 1850 could provide the kind for his family in the manner we saw in the 1950s? Really? Where did you go to school?
Darkwing 2 years, 1 month ago
Where do you get your figures, Jim? The colonies were far more prosperous than you paint, and the mid-19th century had a higher standard of living than you credit them with. But that of course, makes them not part of your core consituency.
JimHeim 2 years, 1 month ago
This country is far more prosperous than we were then, but the prosperity only extends to the top few percent of the population, much like your favorite century. The war against the middle class is pretty much the only one being won.
Darkwing 2 years, 1 month ago
You know me less well than you think. My favorite century is the 23rd. As for prosperity, Americans don't know what poverty is, so don't think I'm buying your tripe, Jim.
MikeNC 2 years, 1 month ago
Moonchild, Liberty is the freedom to have the "opportunity" to succeed and not be subject to the "social class cast system" which ruled EUROPE. Liberty, does not "guarantee" you'll succeed, if you work hard. What it does do is give you the opportunity to succeed.
Merchants and Traders were considered "middle Class" even in Medieval Europe.
Talk about Glenn Beck's spooky talk " Gays and Lesbians will be strung up on barbed wired fence posts dying the most horrible of death?" Yikes, Beck almost sounds like Mother Teresa after that statement. Moonchild, I hope you don't take some of the comments you make, seriously. Diane
JimHeim 2 years, 1 month ago
Some opportunity! The U.S has a worse upward mobility rate than any western European country. The American middle class has been under attack by Republicans since Reagan and the rich are winning. No surprise; they've rigged the game. Wake up and look around.
JimHeim 2 years, 1 month ago
No need; you wouldn't accept my sources. Do some research, learn. You'll be better for it.
Darkwing 2 years, 1 month ago
Dan Rather, Geraldo Rivera, Kieth Olbermann? Probably right we wouldn't accept 'em.
JimHeim 2 years, 1 month ago
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/2/7/45002641.pdf . Note Figure 5.1 which shows how family wealth correlates with offspring's success. Some upward mobility. Yeah, I know; Europeans are inferior to Americans and probably don't know math.
JimHeim 2 years, 1 month ago
Sorry, Ryan is a hack. His plan to bankrupt seniors in the name of fiscal responsibility is in no way serious. The best plan for Social Security is to do nothing - that will give future seniors a better return on their investment than any plan put forward by today's politicians.
As for the long term, let the Bush tax cuts expire and get out of the pointless war business. Then we'll be in a position to tackle the only real fiscal problem America faces - out of control health care costs.
JimHeim 2 years, 1 month ago
Obama yielded to the hostage takers in the tax cut matter, something of which I do not approve, but there you are. Your ignorance of PPACA is not unusual; many conservatives have no clue how it works. Well, no surprise. You folks don't do complicated. I guess that's why Republicans have so much trouble governing. Rich people are not evil, just greedy and uncaring about how that greed is destroying our country.
JimHeim 2 years, 1 month ago
The national debt is largely a Republican creation, done with malice aforethought. It is intended to bankrupt the country, which in time of war should be counted as treason. It was less than one-trillion-dollars when Reagan submitted his first budget and was three-trillion when Clinton got his turn. That was intentional, and Republican anti-tax boosters are delighted with it.
While Reagan was able to triple the debt, Bush managed to take a surplus and turn into a doubling of the debt. Those were his budgets and he did it on purpose. Those are facts.
As far as health care goes, by 2065 medical expenses will consume every dollar produced by our economy if nothing is done. We are working on lowering costs and PPACA is the first pass. It needs more and we're working on that too. Your side just sits on the sidelines praying for failure. Nice.
JimHeim 2 years, 1 month ago
In every case the Republican president proposed an out-of-balance budget and signed the resulting measure passed by Congress. They could have vetoed them if the spending was out of line, but they didn't - not once. The budgets submitted were intended to weaken the country. It's that simple. Read Grover Norquist or George Bush.
The country's economy rests on the deficit as it recovers. Every budget cut is making a double-dip recession a higher probability.
JimHeim 2 years, 1 month ago
Google "Bush budget" and you'll get 100 million hits. Google "Obama budget" and you'll get 168 million hits. Google "congressional budget" and you get 10 million. So there.
JimHeim 2 years, 1 month ago
If 47% pay no federal income tax because the are so poor, maybe we need to encourage better wages. But that doesn't mean they're tax free, especially in the South where taxing the poor through regressive sales taxes is a regional sport. Too, they pay FICA and other taxes and fees, so they're still disproportionately taxed. It's much better to be rich.
It's not about punishing the rich; it's about keeping our economy going for their benefit. If you own a million dollar home you'll pay higher insurance rates than if it was worth $100,000. That's not punishment; it reflects the replacement cost of the property. This is a rich, expensive country and it takes real money to operate it. The rich benefit more so they should pay more.
JimHeim 2 years, 1 month ago
Maybe if they spend 2 trillion more, we can get the economy back on track. Bear in mind that deficits fuel the economy. That's why after every period in our history when the budget was in surplus, a recession soon followed. Look it up.
JimHeim 2 years, 1 month ago
There was no middle class in the "good old days." There were a few very rich folks, a small mercantile class to provide services to them and a huge lower class of destitute and near destitute people with no safety net and little chance of moving up.
The middle class was a mid twentieth-century American invention, which conservatives deeply resent.
fugitiveguy 2 years, 1 month ago
Mauiman, you are spot on with this comment. Class warfare is their staple.
Ross 2 years, 1 month ago
There ya go - the ol Bogeymen of the democratic party. You - are a one trick pony!
Darkwing 2 years, 1 month ago
The middle class emerged in the medieval ages, not the 20th century, Jim. Read Santayana on history so you can get off the treadmill.
fugitiveguy 2 years, 1 month ago
Sometimes I wonder if Heim and Moonchild were separated at birth.
JimHeim 2 years, 1 month ago
That's the amazing thing about propaganda. The millions of dollars pumped into the Fox disinformation machine is paying off as tea partiers support policies that will doom them.
fugitiveguy 2 years, 1 month ago
coming from the party of 1.5 trillion dollar current year deficit combined with a pinochio president who claimed he would cut the deficit in half during his four years thats a real doozy
sgmartin 2 years, 1 month ago
Nothing more aggravating to me than someone pontificating on "what Americans want/ demand/mandated". Surely one can be an American and have a different opinion in terms of how to get to a healthy economy or stronger Americann. I don't think all Republicans/right/conservatives think alike any more than Democrats/liberals/left think alike. Let's start there.
moonchild7 2 years, 1 month ago
I read the Huffington Post once in awhile but not on a regular basis. It was many years ago but in college I studied "WESTERN CIVILIZATION" for 3 Semesters and American History for 2. I still have those "OLD" textbooks so here's a bit of "How it was back then", I don't think the realities of those times have changed since I studied them back in the 70's. From THE RISE and DEVELOPEMENT of WESTERN CIVILIZATION, 1300-1850: "No absolute Monarch had as much control over his subjects as did the King of England(1400-1600's). Absolutism was effective in dealing with non-privileged subjects. Only France had an extensive professional and commercial middle class, yet even it's ambitions were set by the aristocracy. Strikingly absent from the absolutist society were the large commercial middle classes of bankers, merchants, and entrepreners. Europe remained primarily agrarian. Throughout Europe peasants made up the great bulk of the population" And mauiman, President Obama will not be raising taxes on those evil rich people(I never called them evil just greedy). He'll be CLOSING the LOOPHOLES that they use to GET OVER on the rest of Americans and will instead pay the FULL amounts that they've needed to pay for more than 30 yrs now.
JimHeim 2 years, 1 month ago
Well that's a good start. Reagan raised them eleven times, so Obama has a way to go.
blake 2 years, 1 month ago
To be fair, Reagan had a democratic congress and I do not think he initiated any of the increases. In 1982, Ronald Reagan proudly announced that he was getting $3 of spending cuts for every $1 of tax increase. He later lamented that all he ever got were the taxes. "Congress never cut spending by even one penny, " Reagan complained in 1993.
moonchild7 2 years, 1 month ago
Okay mauiman get ready for THESE apparent FACTS from my old history textbook: "The Elizabethan Poor Law of 1601 was the last in a series of statutes directed toward regulating the economy and the social system of England. It made local parishes or districts responsible for providing for the destitute....the success of all legislation eventually depended on local administration. Almost every traditional and executive function of local government was filled by Justices of the Peace...Administering the Poor Law became their largest single task...they set compulsory tax rates and appointed and supervised the overseers of the poor in each district." My, my....even in Elizabethian England the "government" had to HELP the POOR!!!!!!!!! It sort of is amazing that they were somewhat CIVILIZED enough to recognize the need to help the POOR amonst themselves. Could that have been one reason England became such a SUPER POWER?!
Bflat 2 years, 1 month ago
Detroit is an example of a city that helped the poor and became corrupt. Welfare systems created problems in that those that don't want to work can figure out the system and corrupt it. This is one of the reasons why those who work hard get tired of seeing all the help and gifts given to certain "poor." Take for instance those poor people on cell phones that draw a monthly check.
moonchild7 2 years, 1 month ago
What does my post have to do with the theme of this thread? EVERYTHING! Here we go again. Geoff Cutler says that Paul Ryan's Budget Proposal doesn't pander to the American people. OF COURSE IT DOES! His TEAPOT Budget cuts entitlements, but doesn't raise taxes on the rich or even touch Defense spending. That's their continued pandering to the DUMBEST of AMERICANS who won't see how very WRONG that is. My take on the "POOR" argument comes after MikeNC made a statement about who "got off the boat" when our country was founded. They didn't get of their boats with Louis Vuitton Luggage, headed to the local Waldorf Astoria. Mr. Cutler used de Tocqueville's words of "middle class" when talking about the people he met in America in 1830. He didn't meet a true American Middle Class in the 1830's! The people who emigrated from Europe were not middle class either. From another old history book of mine(THE NATIONAL EXPERIENCE: AMERICAN HISTORY to 1855). "Before the end of the colonial period most Americans were living together in one of four distinct patterns: the Southern Plantation, the New England town, the loose collection of individividual farms, or the coastal city." Not much middle class there.
moonchild7 2 years, 1 month ago
Oh, and if you really want to know who we are and how we got here as AMERICAN'S read this book" THE RENEGADE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES by Thaddeus Russell. It was NOT the Founding Fathers who really established our liberties(they just wrote about them)but rather the drunkards, pirates, indians, slaves, prostitutes and laggards. I read it a few weeks ago and it really is excellent. So, that's who a lot of us are Mr. Cutler, and because of that there will always be POOR PEOPLE to have to take care of, just as the English did back in 1601.
moonchild7 2 years, 1 month ago
This "REWRITING" of our HISTORY just makes me so mad!!!!!!! And DETROIT? The poor DID NOT create the problems there. The Rich and very Wealthy Auto Moguls did! They started to send all the work overseas so they could make their bottom lines larger. Any of you ever been to Detroit? I did back in the 70's just before "the end" started and then it was a great place. They had the FIRST Mall I ever went to. MALLS...actually they had four huge malls! New cars everywhere, expanding suburbs, the first MALL Movie Theater I ever went to and a Dinner Movie Theater at that. I've never seen one since. In 2003 I went back thru Detroit on a vacation to Canada! WOW, HORRIBLE! I couldn't even find the house of the friend I had visited in the 70's. It reminded me of what the BRONX in NYC was like in the 70's. Torched and Trashed. They changed places. This talk is dangerous because the TEAPOTS are trying to rewrite reality and way too many people are buying into it.
geoffcutler 2 years, 1 month ago
Moon, I've read your comments on our history in the above thread, and...can't think how to respond. You Win!
Mauiman, nice work on here!
moonchild7 2 years, 1 month ago
Thanx Geoff, just what do I win? A one way ticket to Havanna? You write often about many good subjects and seem quite concerned about our government but what is it about the Teapots that you admire? That they speak their minds? I was with a group of other "like-minded" souls in the 60's and 70's protesting our government involvement in the Vietnam War. Our government was really out of control then and subverting FREEDOM and LIBERTY. Don't you consider that admirable too? And mauiman, the "Historical References" were not my say so. I have no idea if this textbook is even around anymore but it was a very good one. I took the A. History classes in my Sophmore Yr. THE NATIONAL EXPERIENCE(1973) Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, that was written/edited by John Blum(Yale U), Edmund Morgan(Yale U), Willie Lee Rose(U of VA), Arthur Schlesinger Jr(CUNY), Kenneth Stampp(U of CA, Berkeley), and finally C. Vann Woodward(Yale U). I think those guys really knew the history of America and don't doubt what they had to say.
nolabel 2 years, 1 month ago
Don't shoot the messenger. Just some opinions from Republican economists about Ryan's budget proposal.
"It doesn't address in any serious or courageous way the issue of the near and medium-term deficit," David Stockman said in a phone interview.
"I think the biggest problem is revenues. It is simply unrealistic to say that raising revenue isn't part of the solution. It's a measure of how far off the deep end Republicans have gone with this religious catechism about taxes."
Stockman, who directed Ronald Reagan's Office of Management and Budget, approves of Ryan's entitlement proposals, but breaks faith over taxes and the GOP's unwillingness to slash defense spending. And he laughs off the notion that the plan will do anything about unemployment, let alone dramatically reduce it, which Ryan and his plan claim it will. "This isn't 1980. It's not morning again in America. it's late afternoon, or possibly even sunset."
nolabel 2 years, 1 month ago
Doug Holtz-Eakin -- a former McCain and George W. Bush economic adviser said that Ryan's plan is "implausibly optimistic."
The libertarian economist Tyler Cowen wrote up a point-by-point critique of the plan. His principle objections are that the plan doesn't do anything to control health care costs, and cutting Medicaid is neither good policy, nor urgent. Indeed, he notes, "Medicaid should be one of the last parts of the health care budget to cut." Emphasis in the original.
My problem with the author of this article is that it seems like talking points are being thrown in instead of actual factual information from let's say economists.
Regardless of what side you're on, being void of facts is not a smart way to choose who is doing a better job. I have to wonder if the author has even read Ryan's budget plan. The reason why "We" don't know who we are is because "we" have seem to have become a nation that accepts "opinions" from MSNBC, CNN, and Fox News as fact.
It seems to be an oxymoron for the author to suggest that "politicians" are playing games, yet finds no hypocrisy by stating "Congressman Ryan isn’t pandering to the American people when he stands in front of the television cameras."
Every Politician in Washington panders. I find a sham in the fact that Republicans can consistently state that they are not for "raising the tax rate on anyone." Proposing to give a tax break to the top 2% of earners in this country on the backs of seniors is definitely a "sham" in my opinion. It is also a sham for Democrats not to ever want to get serious about real cuts.
We as a country have lost focus. Why should better education be a Democratic vs Republican issue? Why should investing in clean energy to break ourselves from foreign oil be a Democratic vs Republican issue? Why does it have to be if a Democrat or the President is for it, then Republicans are against it, or if the Republicans are for it, Democrats are against it? Its amazing how Congressmen/women make a mockery out of "The American People," yet they collect their paychecks, and "gov't" healthcare and call it a day.
Talking points have now replaced facts. Its like children gossiping about what "they heard," without having any knowledge of the truth. On Fox and Friends the other morning during a discussion about planned parenthood, the co-hosts announced that planned parenthood was not a big deal because "women could get pap smears and breast exams at Walgreens!"
They said it with a straight face, and Walgreens responded. Perfect example of talking points being presented as fact. Some people may laugh, but many people can't or choose not to distinguish fact from fiction.
geoffcutler 2 years, 1 month ago
When I said politicians were pandering to the American people, I meant all politicians, Republican and Democratic. The reason for bringing up Paul Ryan is that no other congressmen or Senator has devoted the time he has to the economy, budget, deficits, National Debt, tax code and entitlerments.That's all he does. He is the first to propose cuts at such a magnitude, realizing that if it doesn't happen, we'll fail. There's no hypocrisy here, just reality.
geoffcutler 2 years, 1 month ago
Hey James! Glad you're on. Shall we ride again?
geoffcutler 2 years, 1 month ago
Umm...not so sure. Off base, perhaps, but semi-lucid.
moonchild7 2 years, 1 month ago
nolabel...that's so funny but NOT me. President Obama...HOORAH!!! $400 billion more in cuts for defense spending...HOORAH!!!! His message to the teapots and republicans concerning Ryans budget: "These are the kind of cuts that tells us we can't afford the America that I believe in, I believe it paints a vision of our future that's deeply pessimistic...There's nothing serious about a plan that claims to reduce the deficit by spending a trillion dollars on tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, there's nothing courageous about asking for sacrifice from those who can least afford it and don't have any clout on Capital Hill." Thank You President Obama.