This week, I wanted to go back to the 9th grade, when, as is custom in North Carolina, I took civics class. In 9th grade civics, we talk about basic political philosophy. One topic that we covered is the social contract theory, which states that, when we all agree to live in a society, we give up certain freedoms and allow our government certain powers in exchange for the benefits and safety that come from living in organized society. The government’s power to put people in jail and, in extreme cases, administer the death penalty comes from the social contract. Because of these powers, scholars and legal theorists say the government has a monopoly on coercion – only the government can legally jail or kill.
The right’s continuing fascination with the Paul family (father and son), who love to use the phrase government coercion, has made a real change in the national dialogue. The Pauls’ philosophy dovetails nicely with the rise of the Tea Party, who like to speak as though we live under a monarchy; that our current situation is analogous to that of James Madison and Benjamin Franklin. Rand Paul titled his book Government Bullies. Ron Paul said on the House floor that:
“It is true that liberty is not free, nor is it easy. But tyranny – even varying degrees of it – is much more difficult, and much more expensive. The time has come to rein in the federal government, put it on a crash diet, and let the people keep their money and their liberty.”
Newt Gingrich picked up on these themes and said of Obamacare:
“When Secretary Sebelius (the HHS Secretary) said the other day she would punish insurance companies that told the truth about the cost of Obamacare, she was behaving exactly in the spirit of the Soviet tyranny. And if she’s going to represent left-wing thought police about Obamacare, she should be forced to resign by the new Congress.”
These are not fringe members of the party. Gingrich won states in the Republican primary. Ron Paul was a 30-year congressman and still quite the thought leader amongst among a part of the party. He was just commissioned to write homeschool textbooks so that followers can bring up their children with his philosophy. Rand Paul is a senator. They walk around denouncing major pieces of the social contract, calling the duly elected government illegitimate tyrants.
This word keeps coming up: Tyranny. It pops up in both of the above quotes. At the RISPEC Conference, the director of the Rhode Island Center for Freedom and Prosperity Mike Stenhouse used the word repeatedly to describe the actions of Congress, President Obama, and Governor Chaffee. Governor Chaffee’s programs do not represent tyranny. Nor do Secretary Sebelius’. Under tyranny, Mr. Stenhouse would be shot for speaking out against the governor. That is tyranny.
I give Mr. Stenhouse a lot of credit for coming and giving his speech at Brown to what was assuredly not a preaching-to-the-choir audience (it included students from colleges from all over Rhode Island, mainly Brown, PC, RIC, and URI). He was game and fun and spent a lot of time engaging with students on a Saturday. However, such overblown language makes it impossible to take his real ideas seriously. Mr. Stenhouse knows Lincoln Chaffee is not a tyrant, but he uses the language to get a rise out of people, and it backfires.
Real differences in philosophy exist. There real disagreements among good people who want the best thing for Rhode Island and America. We cannot afford to spend so much time on name-calling. Both sides are guilty; Democrats said crazy things about George W. Bush, too. For this reason, everyone must remember the social contract. We have the privilege in this country to be able to vote out public servants who do not reflect our values. Next year, Governor Chaffee will be up for reelection. If he wants, Mr. Stenhouse can run against him, proof positive that nobody in Rhode Island is a tyrant.
I would like to thank the folks at the Rhode Island Student Empowerment Conference and their organization Of/by/for/RI for putting on such a great event this past meeting. If you have been looking for something cool to do in RI, I recommend getting connected with them. Check them out here: http://www.ofbyforri.com
May I suggest that the author is confusing “tyranny” with “terrorism”?
If the government were to shoot me for my views, that would be terrorism or murder.
If the government were to abuse its power, against the will and freedom of the people, like the long train of abuses and usurpations that inspired our Declaration of Independence … that is tyranny or Despotism.
But if you never signed that social contract, and it violates the Constitution that actually WAS ratified, and you think it was a bad idea and since 9 have decided their teaching you you agreed to it was their own wishful thinking… then what?
Do you ever question that it is what they want the rules to be, this ‘social contract’ they say exists that wasn’t agreed to by the people?
Or not?