The decline of a civilization

[verga]

Several years ago I was discussing several issues with a friend of mine who has a Ph.D. in Sociology. From a historical perspective most societies have lasted approximately 200 years before they fell into decline and eventual usurpation by another group. This decline and fall has always been preceded by three things. This is not to say that these occurrences are the proximate cause of this fall . It it is not to say that every society that was conquered by another had allowed all of these to happen.
These occurrences are: 1) The creation of a welfare  state.
There is disagreement over the author of the following quote. Some it is Alexis de Tocqueville:, others say it is Alexander Fraser Tytler.
A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.

LBJ brought the "Great Society in to existence just over 50 years ago. we are now looking at multi generational families that know of no other existence.

2) A decline in moral values leading to the breakdown of family units and rampant corruption of public officials.
In his seminal work “The Negro Family: The Case for National Action,” a 1965 government report by Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who was then at the Department of Labor spoke of the illegitimacy rate of African american at 36 percent today it is approximately 72 percent. Hispanics have a rate of just over 50% and Whites are at 36 percent. None of these numbers can e expected to decrease in the foreseeable future unless significant chagnes are made in the public's attitude.

The founding fathers idea of governance was to serve for a short term and then return to private citizenship and live under the very laws they established. Jefferson said this about the Constitution: “The…feature I dislike, and greatly dislike, is the abandonment in every instance of the necessity of rotation in office, and most particularly in the case of the President,”
Today we have elected officials that have never worked outside of the public sector and members of both houses that view their positions as life time appointments. They receive a life time pension after garnering millions in bribes and graft.

3) Illegitimate alliances leading to unnatural "peace".
For the past seven and a half years we have been been apologizing many third world nations and surrendering our place of prominence. Our leaders have been maligning the greatness of our country while surrendering our ability to govern ourselves, making us subject to the whims of the United Nations. Thomas Jefferson sent the Marines tot he shores of Tripoli to end the payment of blackmail by the United States to Muslim terrorists. Today our military personnel and regular citizens are subject to kidnapping, abuse, rape, and every other form of  abuse you can imagine and some you can't. America is no longer feared or respected on the world stage.

The fictional charecter Jeb Bartlett said on the television show "The West Wing": "Did you know that two thousand years ago a Roman citizen could walk across the face of the known world free of the fear of molestation? He could walk across the Earth unharmed, cloaked only in the protection of the words civis Romanus -- I am a Roman citizen. So great was the retribution of Rome, universally understood as certain, should any harm befall even one of its citizens."
While this may be enraging in ha bit of hyperbole there is a certain element of truth to it

A final quote attributed to both Alexis de Tocqueville:, and Alexander Fraser Tytler The average age of the world's greatest civilisations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to complacency; From complacency to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.

[Chieftain]

Well written piece.  I would add that the Second Amendment has provided for a well-armed population, and the ability for that population to take back control of the Government under the proper circumstances. 

The biggest problem we have right now is that an uninformed voter base 100 years ago was convinced to ratify the 17th Amendment to the US Constitution, which disassembled a primary safety of State Checks and Balances, by turning election of the Senate to "the people".  In fact, control of the Government shifted from "the people" to the two political parties.

Lenin said that revolutions are pointless without firing squads.  Others have said that the best way to kick off a revolution is by shooting the right 100 people in the street first.

These days one has to wonder how far away we are from both.

 

[r9etb]

The biggest problem we have right now is that an uninformed voter base 100 years ago was convinced to ratify the 17th Amendment to the US Constitution, which disassembled a primary safety of State Checks and Balances, by turning election of the Senate to "the people".  In fact, control of the Government shifted from "the people" to the two political parties.

Eh, I don' t know about that.  Although nominally the selection of Senators was allocated to the legislatures of the several states, the reality prior to the 17th Amendment is that the power to select Senators rested almost entirely in the hands of the party machines.  Reverting to the old methods today  would have the same result -- a bad enough prospect then, but a far worse prospect in today's political climate.

Honestly, I don't think there's any "best" way to select Senators... one must choose between two poor alternatives.  Selection by legislatures would insulate the Senators from the vicissitudes of popular opinion, but the involvement of party machinery also makes Senators unaccountable to the electorate.  Popular election of Senators theoretically provides accountability to the electorate, but at the cost of making Senators subject to popular opinion.

Of course, either approach would work fine if the pool of senatorial candidates were made up of responsible statesmen, as the Founders envisioned.  But since neither parties nor the populace nor the pool of candidates are interested in statesmanship anymore, there's no hope that any method of selection would make things better.

[verga]

Eh, I don' t know about that.  Although nominally the selection of Senators was allocated to the legislatures of the several states, the reality prior to the 17th Amendment is that the power to select Senators rested almost entirely in the hands of the party machines.  Reverting to the old methods today  would have the same result -- a bad enough prospect then, but a far worse prospect in today's political climate.

Honestly, I don't think there's any "best" way to select Senators... one must choose between two poor alternatives.  Selection by legislatures would insulate the Senators from the vicissitudes of popular opinion, but the involvement of party machinery also makes Senators unaccountable to the electorate.  Popular election of Senators theoretically provides accountability to the electorate, but at the cost of making Senators subject to popular opinion.

Of course, either approach would work fine if the pool of senatorial candidates were made up of responsible statesmen, as the Founders envisioned.  But since neither parties nor the populace nor the pool of candidates are interested in statesmanship anymore, there's no hope that any method of selection would make things better.

I don't remember where I read it, but the original intent was for the House be the "Peoples" house. by having them subject to recall every two years they were more susceptible to the vagaries of public opinion. On the other hand the Senate with it's longer term was supposed to be the more mature deliberative body.
Instead both groups have turned into a privileged ruling class. They use power to keep power and amass power. Until we take the profit out of the positions we will continue to get the leaders we have  been getting since the late 1800's.

[r9etb]

Instead both groups have turned into a privileged ruling class. They use power to keep power and amass power. Until we take the profit out of the positions we will continue to get the leaders we have  been getting since the late 1800's.

Right -- which pretty much rules out the 17th Amendment as the source of our troubles.  I suspect the real roots of the problem are more mundane: apathy and greed.

[DiogenesLamp]

Well written piece.  I would add that the Second Amendment has provided for a well-armed population, and the ability for that population to take back control of the Government under the proper circumstances. 

The biggest problem we have right now is that an uninformed voter base 100 years ago was convinced to ratify the 17th Amendment to the US Constitution, which disassembled a primary safety of State Checks and Balances, by turning election of the Senate to "the people".  In fact, control of the Government shifted from "the people" to the two political parties.

I wouldn't say that is the biggest problem.   Most of the amendments since the first 10 are dreck. They are mostly  wrong headed contortions of stupidity.


The 14th has been particularly abused,   but the grand slam rankest idiocy of them all was the 24th amendment.   *That*  was the suicide pill.    The same policies represented by the 24th are what killed the Roman Empire.   

[DiogenesLamp]

Right -- which pretty much rules out the 17th Amendment as the source of our troubles.  I suspect the real roots of the problem are more mundane: apathy and greed.

I would say the real roots of the problem are prosperity and human nature.   

[Chieftain]

I wouldn't say that is the biggest problem.   Most of the amendments since the first 10 are dreck. They are mostly  wrong headed contortions of stupidity.


The 14th has been particularly abused,   but the grand slam rankest idiocy of them all was the 24th amendment.   *That*  was the suicide pill.    The same policies represented by the 24th are what killed the Roman Empire.

My point was that the 17th Amendment completely wrote the States out of the Checks and Balances assigned to them in the Constitution....

[Smokin Joe]

My point was that the 17th Amendment completely wrote the States out of the Checks and Balances assigned to them in the Constitution....

Exactly. The States Legislatures chose the Senate, the people chose the House. The Senate equally represented each State, giving them all an equal voice in matters which affected them. The House, where the revenue bills must originate, represented the people, based on population. This balanced both interests against the Executive Branch and each other, with the Courts as a further check for redress of grievances.

Since the 17th, the Senate has been elected by the People and the power has been stripped from the States, weakening the Republic.