Remembering why Madison did what he did
by Melvyn L Fein
October 27, 2013 09:50 PM | 828 views | 1 1 comments | 36 36 recommendations | email to a friend | print
A few weeks ago, my wife and I attended the annual meeting of the Georgia Sociological Association. One of the presenters there was a political scientist from Armstrong-Atlantic State University. He posed an interesting question. Can a Marxist or a neo-Marxist government avoid becoming tyrannical?

This professor did not fully answer the question, yet he, and we in the audience, were aware that Communist Russia, Red China, North Korea, Eastern Europe, Pol Pot’s Cambodia and Fidel’s Cuba had all fallen into this trap. Each proclaimed its noble aspirations, then proceeded to snuff out any vestiges of democracy.

Was there something about a collectivist ideology that produced this result? While we at the meeting did not come to a final conclusion, there was a rough consensus that concentrating too much power in the hands of a few leaders probably had something to do with the usual outcome.

Marxism, communism, socialism and even to some degree social democracy all advocate that the state must protect people from social unfairness. The government is supposed to see to it that no one gets a better break than anyone else. Under Marxism there is to be a “dictatorship of the proletariat,” whereas under socialism the state is to own the means of production. Social democracy does not go this far. It merely demands that the government regulate virtually all economic transactions, as well as protect individuals from their own foolish choices.

Barack Obama is a social democrat. Not quite a socialist, he wants the government to oversee and regulate virtually all medical interventions, all financial transactions and every potential environmental incursion. He also wants to increase transfer payments from the rich to the poor, usually by raising taxes and increasing welfare benefits.

These activities are undertaken in the name of the people. The “best and the brightest,” which is to say the liberals, are to implement the equivalent of Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s General Will. They are to provide what the people really want — even if the people themselves do not know it.

The trouble is that all such programs must be put into practice by actual human beings and that we humans are corruptible. As Lord Acton warned, power tends to go to the heads of people who attain too much of it. Liberals understand that this is true for business tycoons; they fail to recognize that it is also true for politicians and bureaucrats.

The Obamacare debacle is a prime example. Politicians infatuated with their compassionate instincts bit off more than they could chew. Utterly incompetent when it came to organizing so immense an enterprise, they jumped into it feet first anyway.

So far the Internet run-out has proved a complete fiasco. Much too expensive, crony-ridden, ill-conceived and subject to the usual cover-ups, it forecasts what is likely to be the equally inept execution of the program itself.

Mark my words. Obamacare is sure to be rife with favoritism, multiple hands in the cookie jar, fraud, dishonest evaluations of performance, broken promises and budget over-runs that would make a convict blush.

While I am sure some of those in this mess really have good intentions, imbuing them with so much power is an invitation to arrogance. People who imagine themselves to be gods on Earth somehow find a way to rationalize their mistakes and to overreach their abilities.

Power is a potent narcotic. It distorts the way people under its influence perceive reality and seduces them into over-estimating their capacities. From their perspective they are merely doing good when they send counter-revolutionaries to the Gulag or impose the medical insurance policies citizens must buy.

James Madison understood the temptations inherent in power. He realized we humans are not angels and must be restrained from going overboard. That is why he gave us a constitution in which powers are balanced by competing powers. We would do well to remember why he did.

Melvyn L. Fein, Ph.D., is professor of sociology at Kennesaw State University.

Comments
(1)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
East Cobb Senior
|
October 28, 2013
Madison was very astute and recognized the folly that to much power in the hands of a few can reek on all aspects of society as a whole. The problem we are experiencing is that the checks and balances he put in place are not doing the job for which they were intended. When the other two branches of government either fail in their responsibility or are thwarted in their efforts to neutralize excesses, then the system will break down.

Unfortunately history has taught us that when the masses feel disenfranchised, they are susceptible to radical rhetoric and unscrupulous influences of individuals that can lead to anarchy and revolution. It is past time for the other two branches of our government to recognize the dissatisfaction of a majority of our fellow citizens with the direction in which our country is heading and exert some balance, using their prerogatives as enumerated in our Constitution.

*We welcome your comments on the stories and issues of the day and seek to provide a forum for the community to voice opinions. All comments are subject to moderator approval before being made visible on the website but are not edited. The use of profanity, obscene and vulgar language, hate speech, and racial slurs is strictly prohibited. Advertisements, promotions, and spam will also be rejected. Please read our terms of service for full guides