Democracy or republic, and what type of republic? We are not Roman Empire 2.0, but there have movements to mold us into something different. Woodrow Wilson started, will we recall what type of republic we were meant to be? Technocrats will command at all costs.
Bunker Hill, history of centralized control, a country that went through that process, and of course music. Tonight on Sunday Nights Radio.
Don’t Fire Until You See The Whites Of Their Eyes: 250th Anniversary of Bunker Hill
Jun 17, 1775 Massachusetts defends Boston at Charleston.
Despite the prevailing conventional wisdom that the British had a superior fighting force due to its experience in European Continental style of fighting with rigid formations on an open field, the American loss at Bunker Hill demonstrated to the colonists not to discount their ingenuity, knowledge of terrain and resourceful nature.
The British suffered a loss of 1054 of casualties or fatalities, the American only 450. Despite the battle being a tactical loss for the Americans, it came at a great price for the British who suffered twice the losses.
A Democracy or A Republic?
Hamilton’s Arguments in Federalist 9
Hamilton saw threats to unity:
A firm union will be of the utmost moment to the peace and liberty of the states, as a barrier against domestic faction and insurrection. It is impossible to read the history of the petty republics of Greece and Italy, without feeling sensations of horror and disgust at the distractions with which they were continually agitated, and at the rapid succession of revolutions, by which they were kept perpetually vibrating between the extremes of tyranny and anarchy. If they exhibit occasional calms, these only serve as short-lived contrasts to the furious storms that are to succeed.
Government’s role was to take steps to prevent factions from forming in the first place, as a faction could generate violence and as Hamilton demonstrated, could end the stability of a government. This illustrates a dichotomy between liberty and security. The trouble with a majority rule is that it sewed the seeds for discontent that a dictator such as Napoleon could capitalize on.
Ignored At The Constitutional Convention
The Founders and the Constitution: Alexander Hamilton
On June 18, 1787, he delivered a day-long speech outlining his proposals. These proposals stretched the concept of “republican government” to the breaking point. Hamilton advocated:
a chief executive elected indirectly for life with an absolute veto over legislation;
a bicameral legislature with an elected lower house balanced by a senate indirectly elected for life;
appointment of state governors by the national authorities, with each governor to enjoy an absolute veto over state laws; and
almost no restraints on the power of the central government.
An Agrarian Republic Or An Industrial Republic?
If it Ain’t Written Down, The Government Can’t Do It
Hamilton, after campaigning for the adoption the Constitution and a strong federal government that would be constrained, conveniently abandoned that position in favor of promoting “Implied Powers” to justify the creation of the first Federal Bank for the United State, and true bank run by the government.
Hamilton saw centralized banking, centralized finance and manufacturing at the key to power. In 1791, as the Secretary of the Treasury under Washington Hamilton urged Congress to open and central bank, and create that entity by passing a law. Jefferson and Madison opposed this.
Hamilton’s argument from the concept that in order for the federal govt to function, it has the power to carry out it’s duties. Circumstances would change, and the federal government had the ability to take the steps it needed. Otherwise that government could not function.
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/bank-ah.asp
The expediency of exercising a particular power, at a particular time, must, indeed depend on circumstances, but the constitutional right of exercising it must be uniform and invariable, the same to-day as to-morrow.
All the arguments, therefore, against the constitutionality of the bill derived from the accidental existence of certain State banks, institutions which happen to exist to-day, and, for aught that concerns the government of the United States, may disappear tomorrow, must not only be rejected as fallacious, but must be viewed as demonstrative that there is a radical source of error in the reasoning.
“The main proposition here laid down, in its true signification is not to be questioned.” But he continued, insisting, “It is not denied that there are implied as well as express powers, and that the former are as effectually delegated as the latter.”
- Alexander Hamilton’s doctrine of “implied powers” fundamentally altered the original intent of the Constitution, leading to an overreach of federal power.
- During the ratification debates, supporters of the Constitution, including Hamilton, assured the public that the federal government would only exercise explicitly enumerated powers. However, Hamilton later advocated for “implied powers,” which the article argues is a reversal of his previous position.
Like Elawn, Vivek and others, they quickly modify their positions or discard them entirely.
Virulent Opposition
To say that Hamilton’s proposition
- James Madison’s View: The article cites James Madison’s view from Federalist #45 that the federal government’s powers are “few and defined”. Madison also warned against “the doctrine of implication”.
- Reversal of Original Intent: The author contends that Hamilton’s doctrine of implied powers effectively overturned the original constitutional structure, leading to the expansion of federal power to “numerous and indefinite”.
- The First Bank of the United States: Hamilton’s advocacy for implied powers came about when he sought to justify the creation of the First Bank of the United States, which was opposed by people like Thomas Jefferson and James Madison who argued that the Constitution did not grant the federal government the power to charter a bank.
Dangers of Centralization: Empire or Republic
- 1806: Napoleon with amateurs decimated the professional soldiers charged with defending Germany at the Battle of Jena
- Fichte: Germany was not serious about strict education:
- Children would have to be trained through a new form of universal conditioning. They could no longer be trusted to their parents.
- Through forced schooling, everyone would learn that “work makes free” and working for the state, even laying down one’s life to ist command was THE GREATEST FREEDOM OF ALL. Hers in the genius of semantic redefinition lay the power to cloud mens’ minds, a power later packaged and sold by public relations pioneers Edward Bernays and IvyLee.
- The desired Prussian Mind:
- Obedient soldiers
- Obedient workers for factories, mines and farms
- Well subordinated civil servants
- Well subordinated clerks for industry
- Conforming thought in citizen
- National uniformity
Wilson’s Guardians: Frederick Taylor
Frederick Taylor was the first to conduct a formal study on productivity and proudly claimed “What I demand of the worker is not to produce any longer by his own initiative, to execute punctiliously the orders given down to their minute detail.” His life studies culminated in the book Principles of Scientific Management, published in 1907. It is considered the seminal work in efficiency. There principles were turned upon education with devastating effect.
As we have discussed many times in Severed Conscience and during other podcasts, the Prussian education system has been responsible for limiting thought while “training” students to conform and narrow their focus on specialization. The Prussian school was a reaction to the French and Napolean invading Europe, and Germany was dismayed that a sense of national spirit was lacking in the German population, as many did not defend their lands against the French. Taylor, born to a rich family, attended a Prussian school.
Taylor summarized his managerial discipline as:
- A regimen of science, not rule of thumb
- An emphasis on harmony not the discord of competition
- An insistence of cooperation, not individualism
- A fixation on maximum output
- The development of each man to his great productivity
The goal was to make workers interchangeable:
- Mechanically controlled work pace
- Repetition of motion
- Tools and technique selected for worker
- Only superficial attention is asked of worker – keep the production going
“In the past Man has been first. In the future the system must be first”.
Progressivism is rooted here: break from the past, use new research to redesign life, adjust your attitude to love your work is a socialist creed echoed by Taylor.