"If we are to succeed in the great struggle of ideas that is under way, we must first of all know what we believe. We must also become clear in our own minds a to what it is that we want to preserve if we are to prevent ourselves from drifting." From the introduction to F.A. Hayek's The Constitution of LibertyHayek wrote these words in 1960. He wrote Constitution in the United States, his last place of residence preceded by two decades in Great Britain and a youth and life in his native Austria.
He also dedicated the book to the following:
"To the unknown civilization that is growing in America."Reading the introduction in light of the current place and future of freedom in America places significance on this otherwise enigmatic dedication.
What civilization, in 1960, was growing in America? Given Hayek wrote Constitution, an exhaustive and "ambitious and perhaps presumptuous task of approaching [economic problems] through a comprehensive restatement of the basic principles of freedom" (his words), he saw both the danger and potential for American life.
Would American civilization build on the basic principles of freedom and thus continue on the path of prosperity and civilized progress, or would it abandon the genesis of its prosperity and greatness, freedom, and give over to the collectivist and socialist siren call like so many erstwhile free and prosperous countries in the West?
Since 1960 we can fairly say the pendulum has swung significantly to and fro. JFK boasted the virtue of income tax relief, that Americans are due to keep more of the fruits of their labor. This was an encouraging step forward since he was the first Democrat to occupy the Oval Office since Truman, a New Deal hanger-on. LBJ, though, had his turn at accelerating the welfare state by initiating a flurry of redistributionist legislation, Medicare, Medicaid, and the like.
Things again looked up with the election of Nixon, at least a vocal devotee of limited government and freedom. Things soon looked dour, however, as this Republican imposed wage and price controls onto the market, signed into law the creation of the EPA, drummed up an ill-guided and wasteful War on Drugs, and told Congress, "I am a Keynesian now."
Then there was Carter, faithful to the welfare state. Then Reagan, bringing a renewed faith in America and freedom, but not enough so to put freedom at the fore of American political and social life.
Bush 41 made little mark, then Democrat Clinton made the tremendous declaration in his 1996 State of the Union Address, "The era of big government is over."
Whoa. That sounds like a major shift in favor of freedom.
But, alas, it was not, and the era of big government is with us and growing. The Republicans who looked to reorient the political cosmos of The Beltway with their Contract With America proved only to tease the public with promises of a return to a freer country. They did achieve welfare reforem but he best they could muster for the 1996 election was Bob Dole, not exactly a proponent of reigning in government spending and its influence in our lives, as his career in the senate proves.
So we trotted along, not fully devoting ourselves to an outright redistributionist regime, nor reinvigorating a fidelity to freedom by pulling back the tentacles of government overreach in our lives and property.
It seems appropriate, then, that Bush II was the successor of this political double-mindedness. Galloping into town the champion of limited government and less spending, he jetted out of town leaving a 60% increase in federal spending, coming in just under LBJ's 66% increase. He also set the table for our current bailout mania and pushed through the trillion dollar TARP.
And now we have 19 months of Obama and a Democrat Congress under our belts. Looking back on the last Democrat president's statement about the end of big government, that seems like a headline right off The Onion.
So what is the "unknown civilization" in America? Are we fully culminating in a society that embraces or rejects individual freedom?
Taking a step back to survey the wider social landscape in America, it cannot be said America is embracing collectivism. Watching elites trying to annex America to western Europe is like watching an irrationally resolute infant trying to cram a round peg into a square hole; it can be done but not without coercion and an ugly fit. And it just begs the adult in the room to set it right.
True, we've witnessed vast new growth of government, most notably the groundwork for government run health care being set. True, the supposed opposition party to this agenda has not given the voting public any reason to vote for them other that "we're not them."
But also true is the continuing grassroots resistance to government growth, spending, and redistribution. The larger the push for concentration of power in government and less freedom, the bigger the social push-back has been. Largely viewed as the Tea Party movement, such resistance has only gained momentum and influence since it began in the spring of 2009. Primary candidates, for example, with Tea Party backing are having success.
The movement's basic message is an insistence on limited government, fiscal restraint, and a return to a freer and prosperous society. (See the Contract From America)
The concomitant, and thus greatly encouraging, revival of interest in the Constitution, American history, basic rights, and reading of the books that explain, defend, and promote freedom is a social indicator that we are meeting Hayek's concern to know what it is we are preserving, and that we are not drifting.
Interest in freedom has been awakened, revived, and set anew. There is a movement afoot, and it is not restricted to organized protests and rallies. It has moved to living rooms and kitchen tables and pubs and water coolers (or on both sides of filtered water bottles, at least).
The historical record of the political parties is clear enough: we cannot and should not place our hope in them. They must be made to listen to the freedom movement and act accordingly.
Echoes appear and disappear in direct proportion to how long and how strong the voices are that create them. Eventually, public opinion echoes in the halls of legislatures, but only if the voices creating them remain consistent and strong.
A movement based on the principles of freedom can create those echoes and bring about a policy of freedom.
And that's the policy befitting a free civilization.
