WEBVTT

NOTE The Revolution of 1913

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:09.000
First of all, thanks to Lew Rockwell and Jeff Tucker and the Mises Institute for giving me this great honor of giving a talk named after Ludwig von Mises,

2
00:00:09.000 --> 00:00:22.000
one of the great heroes of the 20th century. I dedicate my latest book to von Mises as the most powerful and principled defender of free markets and a free society of the 20th century.

3
00:00:22.000 --> 00:00:39.000
One of the things I'm going to talk about is the Revolution of 1913, which has been talked about and written about quite a bit before, but maybe not quite from the perspective that I'm going to talk about it from.

4
00:00:39.000 --> 00:00:57.000
And this revolution, of course, involves the fact that in one year, we had the creation of the Fed, the income tax, and the 17th Amendment to the United States Constitution, which called for the direct election of senators who were formerly appointed by state legislatures.

5
00:00:57.000 --> 00:01:08.000
And there was more in terms of interventionism, but that's three very big events in that one year, which really are revolutionary.

6
00:01:08.000 --> 00:01:15.200
And an alternative title for my talk could have been The Death of Federalism in America

7
00:01:15.200 --> 00:01:20.520
or The Final Nails in the Coffin of America's Founding Fathers.

8
00:01:20.520 --> 00:01:25.280
Those could have been alternative titles because that's my theme.

9
00:01:25.280 --> 00:01:30.400
So I'm going to give you my conclusion first in that one of the overlooked aspects, not

10
00:01:30.400 --> 00:01:36.000
totally ignored but pretty much overlooked, aspects of this revolution was that it really

11
00:01:36.000 --> 00:01:41.080
really did end once and for all the system of federalism as it was understood by the

12
00:01:41.080 --> 00:01:42.880
American founding fathers.

13
00:01:42.880 --> 00:01:49.700
I think it was almost killed off in 1865 and then the central state spent the next 48 years

14
00:01:49.700 --> 00:01:56.120
consolidating its power so that there would never again be state level resistance to the

15
00:01:56.120 --> 00:02:02.840
growth of the centralized state and this culminated in my view in 1913.

16
00:02:02.840 --> 00:02:07.880
And one of my favorite little books on American politics is a book called America's Political

17
00:02:07.880 --> 00:02:16.280
Dilemma by Gottfried Dietze, so D-I-E-T-Z-E. He taught political philosophy at Johns Hopkins

18
00:02:16.280 --> 00:02:22.000
for many years. I don't know, maybe Bob Higgs even knows it. Bob Higgs was a Johns Hopkins

19
00:02:22.000 --> 00:02:49.400
Federalism instituted to enable the federal government to check oppressions by the governments

20
00:02:49.400 --> 00:02:57.440
of the States, and vice versa, appears to be a supreme principle of the Constitution."

21
00:02:57.440 --> 00:03:01.120
And this was called dual sovereignty by Madison.

22
00:03:01.120 --> 00:03:06.520
The idea, whether you think it made sense or not, was that the citizens of the states

23
00:03:06.520 --> 00:03:11.640
would have certain abilities to check the tyrannical proclivities of the central state,

24
00:03:11.640 --> 00:03:17.000
and at the same time, the central state would have certain abilities to check the tyrannical

25
00:03:17.000 --> 00:03:22.040
Proclivities of the States, State Politicians, State and Local Governments.

26
00:03:22.040 --> 00:03:28.300
And the thinking was that if you want to maximize liberty, this was the system that was set

27
00:03:28.300 --> 00:03:30.600
up in America to do so.

28
00:03:30.600 --> 00:03:38.560
And Dietze also goes on to say, quote, before the Civil War, the nature of American federalism

29
00:03:38.560 --> 00:03:41.320
was still a subject of debate.

30
00:03:41.320 --> 00:03:44.360
The outcome of the Civil War ended that debate.

31
00:03:44.360 --> 00:03:50.680
The Nationalists Emerged as Victors, National Power Increased as the 20th Century Approached

32
00:03:50.680 --> 00:03:53.080
Along with the Disappearance of States' Rights."

33
00:03:53.080 --> 00:03:59.740
And then he goes on to say, quote, this constitutes a revolution that can well be termed a reverse

34
00:03:59.740 --> 00:04:06.760
of the revolution of 1787, that is, the creation of the Constitution, where federalism, understood

35
00:04:06.760 --> 00:04:12.200
as dual sovereignty, was certainly one of the principal tenets, if not the principal

36
00:04:12.200 --> 00:04:42.200
and one final quote here regarding this period Woodrow Wilson before he became president was a political science professor at Princeton as many of you know and in his book on congressional government he wrote enthusiastically and in approval this he said the war between the states established this principle that the federal government is through its courts the final judge of its own powers in quote

37
00:04:42.200 --> 00:05:12.200
and he thought that was a great thing that the Fox would be guarding the head house from here on out and of course this is one of the things that such people as Thomas Jefferson thought would be the end of liberty in America if you allowed ever the central government to be the final judge of the limits of its own powers, it didn't take a genius to forecast that the government would eventually get around to deciding that there are no limits to its powers, which it did. Now this system of federalism or

38
00:05:12.200 --> 00:05:19.200
Sometimes called states' rights or divided sovereignty was never intended to be enforced by the Supreme Court alone.

39
00:05:19.200 --> 00:05:23.200
That's the thinking that most Americans certainly have today because they're used to it.

40
00:05:23.200 --> 00:05:31.200
We hear pronouncements by the Supreme Court, who Clyde Wilson calls the black-robed deities,

41
00:05:31.200 --> 00:05:36.200
and they interpret for us. They tell us how much freedom they're going to allow us to have.

42
00:05:36.200 --> 00:05:38.200
That was never the intention.

43
00:05:38.200 --> 00:05:43.720
And one illustration of how this was never the intention is the history, I'm going to

44
00:05:43.720 --> 00:05:49.880
give a brief history in the time I have of the 17th Amendment that passed in 1913 that

45
00:05:49.880 --> 00:05:55.520
allowed for the direct election of senators by vote as opposed to being appointed by the

46
00:05:55.520 --> 00:05:57.320
state legislatures.

47
00:05:57.320 --> 00:06:03.760
And some of the words of the American founders on the 17th Amendment, Roger Sherman writing

48
00:06:03.760 --> 00:06:12.880
The Senators, being dependent on state legislatures for re-election, will be vigilant in supporting

49
00:06:12.880 --> 00:06:17.760
their rights against infringement by the Legislative or Executive of the United States.

50
00:06:17.760 --> 00:06:26.960
Alexander Hamilton said, election of senators by legislatures was an absolute safeguard.

51
00:06:26.960 --> 00:06:32.300
George Mason said, election of senators by legislatures gives the states some means of

52
00:06:32.300 --> 00:06:37.300
of Defending Themselves Against Encroachments of the National Government.

53
00:06:37.300 --> 00:06:42.220
Fisher Ames said, senators are ambassadors of the states.

54
00:06:42.220 --> 00:06:49.000
Madison in Federalist Number 62 said this, the appointment of senators by state legislatures

55
00:06:49.000 --> 00:06:53.500
gives to state governments such an agency in the formation of the federal government

56
00:06:53.500 --> 00:06:59.940
as must secure the authority of the former, the authority of the former.

57
00:06:59.940 --> 00:07:06.940
So to Madison, the states were sovereign, and that's a foreign idea to most Americans nowadays, but this is the American ideal.

58
00:07:06.940 --> 00:07:13.940
Also, Madison said that the mere enumeration of powers, referring to Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution,

59
00:07:13.940 --> 00:07:18.940
which enumerates the powers of the federal government, would never be sufficient.

60
00:07:18.940 --> 00:07:25.940
He called these mere parchment barriers to the growth of the centralized state so that some sort of structural arrangements would be necessary,

61
00:07:25.940 --> 00:07:32.260
is necessary, not just the written constitution, and one structural barrier would be the appointment

62
00:07:32.260 --> 00:07:39.180
of United States Senators by state legislatures, and also there was the insistence that the

63
00:07:39.180 --> 00:07:44.020
legislature should instruct the senators on how to vote, not just appoint them to office

64
00:07:44.020 --> 00:07:49.340
and send them off to New York or Washington, the capital, but to instruct them on how to

65
00:07:49.340 --> 00:07:50.340
vote.

66
00:07:50.340 --> 00:07:55.660
The very first instruction the senators were given was to meet in public, because as soon

67
00:07:55.660 --> 00:08:09.660
As soon as they started the Senate, the senators decided, we don't need the public to know what we're talking about here, and so they kept it secret, but they were all reprimanded immediately by their state legislatures to meet in public, and they did.

68
00:08:09.660 --> 00:08:39.660
And some examples of this, the 17th Amendment, you know, anti-17th Amendment reasoning, the Kentucky and Virginia Resolves that, you know, Thomas Jefferson is known, the author of the so-called Kentucky Resolve of 1798, which was a response to the Sedition Act, which pretty much made it illegal to criticize the federal government, and quite a few people end up in jail. Every one of them was a member of Jefferson's party,

69
00:08:39.660 --> 00:08:47.660
and the Sedition Act was scheduled to go out of existence on the very day President John Adams left office.

70
00:08:47.660 --> 00:08:56.660
So it was clearly a political tool by Adams and his cohorts to censor criticism from the opponents.

71
00:08:56.660 --> 00:09:06.660
And James Madison co-authored the Virginia Resolve that essentially said that we, the citizens of the states,

72
00:09:06.660 --> 00:09:14.160
are not in agreement with the idea that the federal government is the sole arbiter of constitutional issues,

73
00:09:14.160 --> 00:09:19.160
that we reserve for ourselves the right to determine issues of constitutionality.

74
00:09:19.160 --> 00:09:26.160
We don't think this Sedition Act is constitutional, and we recommend that we just simply don't obey it,

75
00:09:26.160 --> 00:09:30.160
and we don't use our own courts and our own police to enforce the Sedition Act.

76
00:09:30.160 --> 00:09:45.160
And this was the work of the states, the state legislatures, who instructed their senators to oppose them, not all the states, but the states that did oppose it, like Kentucky and Virginia, that's how they did it.

77
00:09:45.160 --> 00:09:52.160
Andrew Jackson is usually given the lion's share of the credit for opposing the Bank of the United States.

78
00:09:52.160 --> 00:10:08.160
If you come to Mises Institute conferences and a session on the history of banking, someone will mention how Andrew Jackson had this pitched political battle with Nicholas Biddle, the head of the Bank of the United States, which was Alexander Hamilton's brainchild.

79
00:10:08.160 --> 00:10:14.160
And of course, Jackson eventually won this battle and the Bank of the United States was defunded.

80
00:10:14.160 --> 00:10:19.200
and then after that after a number of years past we had something called the

81
00:10:19.200 --> 00:10:25.400
independent treasury system with Jeff Hummel the economic historian argues is

82
00:10:25.400 --> 00:10:29.920
probably the most stable monetary system we've ever had in America and Murray

83
00:10:29.920 --> 00:10:35.000
Rothbard gave it pretty good marks too you know no system is perfect but you

84
00:10:35.000 --> 00:10:39.040
know it's probably the best we've ever had that was consistent with the gold

85
00:10:39.040 --> 00:10:49.040
The opposition to the Bank of the United States was very vigorous at the state level too.

86
00:10:49.040 --> 00:11:05.040
Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee, Connecticut, South Carolina, New York and New Hampshire issued resolutions quoting the Kentucky Resolve of 1798 and also urging their senators to oppose the Bank of the United States.

87
00:11:05.040 --> 00:11:22.040
This all became very different after 1865. In 1835, Senator Pellaud Sprague of Maine resigned after ignoring his state legislature's instructions to vote against the Bank of the United States.

88
00:11:22.040 --> 00:11:32.040
The United States Senate, which had a lot of supporters of the Bank of the United States, censored Andrew Jackson for his opposition to the bank.

89
00:11:32.040 --> 00:11:38.040
And after that, several southern states instructed their senators to vote to reverse the censor.

90
00:11:38.040 --> 00:11:47.040
And since they had been in Washington DC for a while, they learned to love the bank for various reasons and they refused.

91
00:11:47.040 --> 00:11:54.040
And so seven southern senators were forced to resign because they refused to vote to repeal the censor of Andrew Jackson.

92
00:11:54.040 --> 00:12:00.040
And so in terms of what actually happened to get rid of this early version of central banking,

93
00:12:00.040 --> 00:12:05.000
banking, it was the citizens of the states through their state legislatures who instructed

94
00:12:05.000 --> 00:12:07.600
their senators to oppose the bank of the United States.

95
00:12:07.600 --> 00:12:13.580
It wasn't just the heroic Andrew Jackson riding up on his white horse with a big sword slopping

96
00:12:13.580 --> 00:12:16.160
the head off of Nicholas Biddle.

97
00:12:16.160 --> 00:12:17.160
That didn't actually happen.

98
00:12:17.160 --> 00:12:22.560
I kind of like that image though of the head of the central bank, but that's sort of the

99
00:12:22.560 --> 00:12:28.180
story that is sometimes told about this, but that's not the whole story.

100
00:12:28.180 --> 00:12:32.980
Many of the founders believed they could never make it in the Supreme Court's self-interest

101
00:12:32.980 --> 00:12:37.980
to protect the rights of the citizens of the states against encroachments and unconstitutional

102
00:12:37.980 --> 00:12:41.700
laws and such by the central government.

103
00:12:41.700 --> 00:12:47.960
Brutus, the anti-federalist, the man who wrote under the name of Brutus, said this, it would

104
00:12:47.960 --> 00:12:53.540
never be in the self-interest of the court to strike down federal laws trenching on the

105
00:12:53.540 --> 00:13:05.540
and the inviolable and residuary sovereignty of the states, because every extension of power of the general legislature, as well as of the judicial powers, will increase the powers of the courts.

106
00:13:05.540 --> 00:13:15.540
And he also mentioned next that it would also likely increase the remuneration of the judges on the court, give them more powers and more responsibility, they can make a case for more pay.

107
00:13:15.540 --> 00:13:24.500
And so it's inherently against their self-interest to minimize the powers of the central government.

108
00:13:24.500 --> 00:13:30.300
And if only the modern libertarian advocates of empowering the Supreme Court to supposedly

109
00:13:30.300 --> 00:13:35.580
defend our liberty would read Brutus, I think we'd all be better off.

110
00:13:35.580 --> 00:13:40.500
And as far as I know, this argument was never refuted, it was just sort of ignored.

111
00:13:40.500 --> 00:13:47.300
But by the time we get to 1913, after the turn of the century, and I'll talk why there

112
00:13:47.300 --> 00:13:52.780
was a movement to get rid of this, well, again, it doesn't take a genius to understand if

113
00:13:52.780 --> 00:13:56.900
you had this pitched battle between the advocates of centralized governmental power and the

114
00:13:56.900 --> 00:14:02.580
advocates of liberty, which means limits on centralized governmental power, the advocates

115
00:14:02.580 --> 00:14:08.460
of liberty wanted the center of power to be in the citizens of the states through their

116
00:14:08.460 --> 00:14:19.460
The advocates of unrestrained centralized governmental power didn't like that, and so there was a political campaign for decades to adopt what became the 17th Amendment.

117
00:14:19.460 --> 00:14:25.460
But there's sort of, I think, of a syllogism that is used to explain the argument for the 17th Amendment.

118
00:14:25.460 --> 00:14:32.460
You know, syllogism has a primary premise, secondary premise, and then a conclusion that's drawn from the first two.

119
00:14:32.460 --> 00:14:39.360
The primary premise is democracy leads to corruption and plunder, the secondary premise is everyone

120
00:14:39.360 --> 00:14:46.600
knows this, conclusion therefore we need more democracy, that's basically the theory underlying

121
00:14:46.600 --> 00:14:50.260
the adoption of the 17th Amendment because there was all this talk of there's corruption

122
00:14:50.260 --> 00:14:55.380
at the state level, we have to do something about the corruption at the state level.

123
00:14:55.380 --> 00:15:03.940
And so, yes, you had politicians or politicians, that you could have had a state-level politicians

124
00:15:03.940 --> 00:15:10.020
who were taking bribes, or senators who were taking bribes from special interests within

125
00:15:10.020 --> 00:15:12.540
the state of Alabama, for example.

126
00:15:12.540 --> 00:15:17.740
The solution, therefore, is to allow that same senator to take bribes from all the states,

127
00:15:17.740 --> 00:15:20.020
not just Alabama, but from the whole country.

128
00:15:20.020 --> 00:15:24.340
So that's why today you have the senator from Alabama going to New York and California to

129
00:15:24.340 --> 00:15:30.740
to Raise Campaign Funds, and you didn't have that before 1913, but it's a sort of a good

130
00:15:30.740 --> 00:15:38.100
example of Misesian interventionism, Mises wrote many times and many places how government

131
00:15:38.100 --> 00:15:43.300
intervention inevitably causes things to get worse rather than better and then the state

132
00:15:43.300 --> 00:15:51.740
uses that fact to introduce even more intervention, and that's what happened in this case in 1866,

133
00:15:51.740 --> 00:15:55.480
The year after the war to prevent southern independence was over.

134
00:15:55.480 --> 00:16:02.500
The federal government passed a law that for the first time mandated how state legislatures

135
00:16:02.500 --> 00:16:04.220
were to appoint senators.

136
00:16:04.220 --> 00:16:10.500
The Constitution already requires senators, but the government never dictated to the states

137
00:16:10.500 --> 00:16:14.660
how they were to go about exactly appointing senators.

138
00:16:14.660 --> 00:16:19.580
And the way it was, was first a voice vote of each house was to be taken, and then if

139
00:16:19.580 --> 00:16:25.740
And there was no clear winner of the Senate seat than a concurrent vote, a private vote,

140
00:16:25.740 --> 00:16:32.260
a secret vote of concurrent of both houses of the legislature would vote if the voice

141
00:16:32.260 --> 00:16:35.540
vote wasn't decisive.

142
00:16:35.540 --> 00:16:43.580
And apparently what happened was the original vote, the voice vote, informed the opponents

143
00:16:43.580 --> 00:16:49.660
of this or that person, who they had to bribe or threaten to avoid having that person being

144
00:16:49.660 --> 00:16:50.660
appointed.

145
00:16:50.660 --> 00:16:53.420
And so what ended up was deadlocks.

146
00:16:53.420 --> 00:16:54.420
This created deadlocks.

147
00:16:54.420 --> 00:17:01.660
And so you did have, like one statistic I dug up, from 1885 to 1912, there were 71 deadlocks

148
00:17:01.660 --> 00:17:07.140
where this month after month after month would go by and certain states did not have a senator

149
00:17:07.140 --> 00:17:11.340
representing them in Washington.

150
00:17:11.340 --> 00:17:16.860
And the deadlocks were typically ended by bribery, that if there was a deadlock, the

151
00:17:16.860 --> 00:17:20.380
winner would actually become the winner by bribery.

152
00:17:20.380 --> 00:17:25.640
And so, therefore, the argument was made, well, there's bribery going on here to break

153
00:17:25.640 --> 00:17:30.660
the deadlocks, caused by the federal law, by the way, therefore, what do we need to

154
00:17:30.660 --> 00:17:31.660
do?

155
00:17:31.660 --> 00:17:34.540
We need to pass another law that'll do what?

156
00:17:34.540 --> 00:17:37.980
Well, allow them to collect bribes, as I said, from all over the country, not just their

157
00:17:37.980 --> 00:17:52.980
in their own state, as they do, because the special interests who want legislation passed that might be good for Californians, but bad for the people of Alabama, they're more than willing to bribe the Senator from Alabama to help have their legislation passed.

158
00:17:52.980 --> 00:18:00.980
There's a congressman, I'll quote here, Congressman James Blaine, on the significance of this amendment.

159
00:18:00.980 --> 00:18:13.980
He said this, and he's referring to the Civil War again. He says, prior to the war, every power was withheld from the national government, which could, by any possibility, be exercised by the state governments.

160
00:18:13.980 --> 00:18:25.980
And what he's referring to here is, before 1861, the only contact the average American citizen had with the central government was through the postal service, and taxes were minimal.

161
00:18:25.980 --> 00:18:32.420
the Equivalent of About $45 a year and so we essentially had you know very tiny

162
00:18:32.420 --> 00:18:36.620
central government and then Blaine congressman Blaine goes on to say after

163
00:18:36.620 --> 00:18:40.740
the war it was believed that everything which may be done by either nation or

164
00:18:40.740 --> 00:18:45.500
state may be done and more securely done by the nation meaning the central

165
00:18:45.500 --> 00:18:50.040
government and so and so what he's saying is this was what part of the

166
00:18:50.040 --> 00:18:54.520
impetus to eventually adopt the 17th amendment and it is belief that the

167
00:18:54.520 --> 00:19:05.520
The central government is so superior to anything the citizens of the states could do that we need to get rid of this idea that the citizens of the states should have direct control over their own senators.

168
00:19:05.520 --> 00:19:11.520
We should let the senators go to Washington and because that's the fount of all truth is Washington D.C.

169
00:19:11.520 --> 00:19:17.520
And so we need to get the riff-raff out of here and don't let them be involved. That's sort of the idea.

170
00:19:17.520 --> 00:19:25.520
And of course, progressivism and populism, which made a god of democracy, also added a lot of weight to the crusade for the 17th Amendment.

171
00:19:25.520 --> 00:19:33.520
That's why I said this syllogism perfectly explains this. Democracy is corrupt, everyone knows it, therefore let's have more of it.

172
00:19:33.520 --> 00:19:44.520
That's basically the argument. And as a law professor at George Mason, named Todd Zwicky, who's written a couple of really interesting articles.

173
00:19:44.520 --> 00:20:12.520
The Ratchet Effect of Federal Intervention persisting after the dissipation of the crisis, which purportedly spawned it, was absent from American history until 1913.

174
00:20:12.520 --> 00:20:17.520
and he argues that the ratchet effect of government where there's a crisis, a war or something like that,

175
00:20:17.520 --> 00:20:26.520
government always ratchets up its powers and its taxes and then after the crisis it may give us back some of our freedom but not all of them

176
00:20:26.520 --> 00:20:29.520
so that there's a permanent elevation in the size and scope of government.

177
00:20:29.520 --> 00:20:41.520
And I wouldn't agree with him that there was no ratchet effect before the war because, for example, the internal revenue bureaucracy was created in the 1860s and it never has gone away.

178
00:20:41.520 --> 00:20:53.520
There was a bit of a ratchet there. But probably not nearly as extreme as Bob Higgs documents in his book Crisis in Leviathan, which starts in the 1890s, the historical section.

179
00:20:53.520 --> 00:20:59.520
But the first real big crisis that Bob writes about is World War I, which came shortly after 1913.

180
00:20:59.520 --> 00:21:05.920
And so in addition to creating a system where each senator can now be bribed by everyone,

181
00:21:05.920 --> 00:21:17.000
everywhere, I think Zwicky makes a good case that the opposition to the ratchet effect after

182
00:21:17.000 --> 00:21:20.520
a crisis was eliminated with this.

183
00:21:20.520 --> 00:21:24.480
So that's part one of the revolution of 1913.

184
00:21:24.480 --> 00:21:31.680
Part two is the income tax that came in, the 16th Amendment, and to give a little historical

185
00:21:31.680 --> 00:21:37.480
perspective, you know, the original Constitution of the United States, tariffs and excise taxes

186
00:21:37.480 --> 00:21:41.840
and occasional public land sales were how the government was funded.

187
00:21:41.840 --> 00:21:45.320
There was no income tax and there were no direct taxes.

188
00:21:45.320 --> 00:21:51.680
All direct taxes were unconstitutional, and one of my all-time favorite political statements

189
00:21:51.680 --> 00:21:57.400
is an expression, among other things, of the evils of an income tax. It's from Thomas Jefferson's

190
00:21:57.400 --> 00:22:03.400
first inaugural address. Many of you have probably heard this before, but I'll read it because I like hearing it every once in a while.

191
00:22:03.400 --> 00:22:09.640
Where Jefferson said, A wise and frugal government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another,

192
00:22:09.640 --> 00:22:14.200
shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement,

193
00:22:14.200 --> 00:22:18.280
and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.

194
00:22:18.280 --> 00:22:21.080
That is the sum of good government, end quote.

195
00:22:21.080 --> 00:22:23.600
And of course, the relevant part here is the government

196
00:22:23.600 --> 00:22:25.240
shall not take from the mouth of labor

197
00:22:25.240 --> 00:22:27.880
the bread it has earned, no income tax.

198
00:22:27.880 --> 00:22:30.800
Jefferson, after the so-called Whiskey Rebellion,

199
00:22:30.800 --> 00:22:34.420
Jefferson also decided that even including excise taxation

200
00:22:34.420 --> 00:22:37.120
as a constitutional function was a bad idea.

201
00:22:37.120 --> 00:22:40.240
He said this, the excise law is an infernal one.

202
00:22:40.240 --> 00:22:43.600
The first error was to admit it by the Constitution,

203
00:22:43.600 --> 00:22:46.040
to allow it into the Constitution.

204
00:22:46.040 --> 00:22:52.520
And, of course, he went along with the elimination of all federal excise taxes as president.

205
00:22:52.520 --> 00:22:58.040
The first income tax by the federal government came in during the Lincoln administration.

206
00:22:58.040 --> 00:23:03.920
And one aspect of this is that, one manifestation of this, is that Walter Block has been entirely

207
00:23:03.920 --> 00:23:10.680
too hard on Milton Friedman because he, I've heard Walter say at some place that Milton

208
00:23:10.680 --> 00:23:13.320
Friedman is the father of income tax withholding.

209
00:23:13.320 --> 00:23:14.320
Is Walter here?

210
00:23:14.320 --> 00:23:15.320
Is he?

211
00:23:15.320 --> 00:23:25.320
Any of you who have said that about Milton Friedman, shame on you, you're not telling the truth, withholding was initiated during the Lincoln administration.

212
00:23:25.320 --> 00:23:35.320
It eventually disappeared, but then it was resurrected by Milton Friedman, so he should be given some credit, but not as much as he's been given for this.

213
00:23:35.320 --> 00:23:45.320
Part of the reason for the American Revolution was the hated stamp tax that King George imposed on the colonists.

214
00:23:45.320 --> 00:23:51.320
They required a purchase of a stamp for every legal document, marriage licenses, property titles.

215
00:23:51.320 --> 00:23:55.320
This was brought back to the Lincoln administration, the stamp tax.

216
00:23:55.320 --> 00:23:58.320
They instituted the first inheritance tax and the income tax.

217
00:23:58.320 --> 00:24:04.320
The Internal Revenue bureaucracy was created for the first time with 185 districts to collect taxes.

218
00:24:04.320 --> 00:24:10.480
taxes, and withholding was adopted, but it didn't, they withheld their almost nothing.

219
00:24:10.480 --> 00:24:16.360
They were pretty incompetent at withholding income. It didn't really work that way. And

220
00:24:16.360 --> 00:24:22.320
the income tax, it started out as a flat tax. Maybe that's why Jack Kent is such a big Lincoln

221
00:24:22.320 --> 00:24:28.160
idolatry, like flat tax. But then it was changed to a progressive tax with rates of five and

222
00:24:28.160 --> 00:24:33.840
ten percent. And the Constitution was simply ignored because at the time direct taxation

223
00:24:33.840 --> 00:25:03.840
was unconstitutional, but they simply called the income tax an excise tax, it's like, you know, let's call it a banana or something, it's not a direct tax, and so that's how they got in and got along with it, and the ability to pay principle was invented by the Lincoln administration to justify the progressive income tax, so we can blame him on that, blame that on the Lincoln administration also, and of course I call the ability to pay principle the

224
00:25:03.840 --> 00:25:33.840
and the Willie Sutton philosophy, the famous bank robber Willie Sutton supposedly when he was asked why did you rob all those banks he said that's where the money is, well that's the ability to pay principle, why do you tax higher income people more that's where the money is, so it's sort of the pinnacle of our philosophical theory behind income taxation is bank robbery, it's a philosophy of bank robbery, well this tax ended in 1872 but it established the precedent

225
00:25:33.840 --> 00:25:39.040
was the precedent of an income tax and whetted the appetites of all the various interests

226
00:25:39.040 --> 00:25:42.440
and saw how they could benefit from income taxation.

227
00:25:42.440 --> 00:25:48.840
And so 68 bills were introduced in Congress to re-institute the income tax between 1874

228
00:25:48.840 --> 00:25:53.840
and 1894 and the seeds of class warfare had been planted.

229
00:25:53.840 --> 00:25:59.240
And that's why I mentioned this historical episode, that the income tax didn't just pop

230
00:25:59.240 --> 00:26:02.960
up all of a sudden after the 20th century.

231
00:26:02.960 --> 00:26:09.440
This was a long fight. Another example of the theory of Misesian interventionism was

232
00:26:09.440 --> 00:26:17.640
how the farmers of America became big supporters of income taxation. And the reason is, when

233
00:26:17.640 --> 00:26:22.200
the Republican Party gained power for the first time in the late 1850s, one of the first

234
00:26:22.200 --> 00:26:26.480
things they did when they had the power to do it was to pass in the House of Representatives

235
00:26:26.480 --> 00:26:40.480
The Moral Tariff Bill, which raised the average tariff rate from about 15 percent to about 32 percent, and then it went up to around 48 percent, and it stayed in that range, the 45 to 50 percent, until 1913.

236
00:26:40.480 --> 00:26:50.480
And so we had very heavily protectionist tariff rates, and farmers are always disproportionately harmed by protectionist tariffs for several reasons.

237
00:26:50.480 --> 00:27:07.480
One, at least historically, most of these tariffs were on manufactured goods, and so that means everything they buy is more expensive, and there were some agricultural products that were protected, but the bulk of what was protected was manufactured goods, so they had to buy more expensive stuff.

238
00:27:07.480 --> 00:27:22.480
Two, they found out whether it was the southern farmers in the 1860s or 1850s, or the Midwestern farmers in the 1880s, they sold a lot of what they made, what they produced on international markets.

239
00:27:22.480 --> 00:27:35.480
In fact, in 1860, between 60 and 75 percent of all the agricultural produce of the South was exported, and the similar numbers, you know, very big percentages of the Midwestern farmers.

240
00:27:35.480 --> 00:27:43.480
And so they found that the cost of farm tools, farm machinery, woolen blankets, shoes, all became more expensive

241
00:27:43.480 --> 00:27:50.480
and they couldn't pass on any of this higher cost of living by charging more for cotton, tobacco, rice and things that are growing

242
00:27:50.480 --> 00:27:53.480
because they had fierce competition internationally.

243
00:27:53.480 --> 00:28:03.480
Third, they realized that if protectionist tariffs dried up trade, which it did, their trading partners had fewer dollars

244
00:28:03.480 --> 00:28:09.560
with which they could buy American farm goods and so that was sort of a triple whammy to the farmers

245
00:28:09.560 --> 00:28:16.760
and so the farmers became a pressure group to reduce the tariff rate by implementing an income tax

246
00:28:16.760 --> 00:28:22.600
and so not only southern farmers midwestern farmers all over and so that's how you know one

247
00:28:22.600 --> 00:28:28.360
intervention protectionist tariffs added a tremendous amount of political support for another

248
00:28:28.360 --> 00:28:34.280
Intervention, Income Taxation, eventually. There was an income tax that was included

249
00:28:34.280 --> 00:28:42.280
as part of a revenue act in 1894. Grover Cleveland pocket vetoed it, but it became law for a

250
00:28:42.280 --> 00:28:47.880
short while, and then the Supreme Court ruled that unconstitutional. When the income tax

251
00:28:47.880 --> 00:28:54.280
was finally adopted in 1913, I'm not going to go over the whole story of all the intrigue

252
00:28:54.280 --> 00:29:01.000
about it, it was a classic bait-and-switch, political bait-and-switch scheme where the

253
00:29:01.000 --> 00:29:07.560
promise was made that the protectionist tariff in the 50% range would be dropped very significantly

254
00:29:07.560 --> 00:29:09.240
in return for the income tax.

255
00:29:09.240 --> 00:29:15.480
That's what the farmers wanted and anybody else who was export dependent wanted.

256
00:29:15.480 --> 00:29:23.120
But this was 1913, but the 1922 Fordney-McCumber Tariff Act increased the average rate back

257
00:29:23.120 --> 00:29:53.120
up to 33.22 percent and the Smoot-Hawley-Hoover tariff of 1930 raised it to an average of about 60 percent, almost 60 percent, it's usually called the Smoot-Hawley tariff but Hoover was for it, so the Smoot-Hawley-Hoover tariff, so it was bait and switch, we'll cut your tariff rate if you give us the income tax, okay said the foolish farmers, they cut it for a few years but it raised right back up and of course the income tax in

258
00:29:53.120 --> 00:30:22.620
itself was another big bait-and-switch scheme. The original income tax, the first bracket, you had to make $20,000 to be in the 1% bracket, the top bracket was 7%, no one paid more than 7%, and you had to make $500,000 to be in the 7% tax bracket, and this was in 1914 when it came into being, so that's $500,000 would jingle in your pocket a little bit in 1913.

259
00:30:22.620 --> 00:30:52.620
Even today it was. But then during the war, the war, you know, the war came, as Abraham Lincoln said, he had nothing to do with it, but World War I came, Woodrow Wilson had nothing to do with it, it just came, and so he had to raise taxes so that by 1918, the top, the first rate was 6%, from 1 to 6, and the income, you only had to make $4,000 instead of $20,000 to be in that bracket, and the top rate

260
00:30:52.620 --> 00:31:22.620
The top rate was increased from 7 to 77 percent on income of a million, to make a million, but 77 percent, but even after the war by 1928, still the top rate was one and an eighth percent on $4,000 of income instead of $20,000, and the top rate was still 25 percent in 1928, and you had to make only $100,000 for the 28 percent, right, so that's a pretty good ratchet there,

261
00:31:22.620 --> 00:31:37.620
And among the consequences, you know, I don't have to go on in this crowd and talk about much of the consequences of income taxation, but I thought I'd run across some of the ones that maybe you haven't really realized or thought about these for a while.

262
00:31:37.620 --> 00:31:51.620
Of course, class hatred was institutionalized forever with the income tax, progressive income tax. Debtor prison was reinstituted. Debtor prison was ended officially by President John Adams, the second president of the United States.

263
00:31:51.620 --> 00:31:56.120
But you know, if you don't pay your income tax, you go to prison.

264
00:31:56.120 --> 00:31:58.320
If you owe a debt to the government, you're going to prison.

265
00:31:58.320 --> 00:32:00.560
So a debtor prison would brought that.

266
00:32:00.560 --> 00:32:03.340
But more importantly for my theme here,

267
00:32:03.340 --> 00:32:07.420
I think the income tax represented as much as anything

268
00:32:07.420 --> 00:32:10.420
the total destruction of federalism or state's rights

269
00:32:10.420 --> 00:32:12.620
altogether because the states really

270
00:32:12.620 --> 00:32:16.120
became mere appendages or franchisees

271
00:32:16.120 --> 00:32:19.040
of the federal government, of the central government in the US.

272
00:32:19.040 --> 00:32:21.160
And the government became totally consolidated

273
00:32:21.160 --> 00:32:26.760
because it had its hands in everybody's pocket for the first time ever.

274
00:32:26.760 --> 00:32:33.120
And the Constitution was no longer able to keep the central government off balance with

275
00:32:33.120 --> 00:32:37.960
the income tax, as the founders hoped, because of the destruction of federalism and the income

276
00:32:37.960 --> 00:32:38.960
tax.

277
00:32:38.960 --> 00:32:45.480
And another aspect of this is that, you know, when Jefferson said the sum of good government

278
00:32:45.480 --> 00:32:51.120
is to not take the bread away from the man who earns it, that was an expression of the

279
00:32:51.120 --> 00:32:57.520
of the Lockean natural rights philosophy that part of your life, liberty and property is

280
00:32:57.520 --> 00:33:02.360
the income you earn from your own toil and for the state to take that away from you they're

281
00:33:02.360 --> 00:33:09.640
depriving you some of your property and so they saw, Jefferson I believe, saw this as

282
00:33:09.640 --> 00:33:15.440
an inherent attack on the natural rights of Americans.

283
00:33:15.440 --> 00:33:20.940
Well the income tax turns up completely around and it establishes the principle that rather

284
00:33:20.940 --> 00:33:27.940
If we have been protecting natural rights, the government is going to destroy natural rights by taking income through income taxation.

285
00:33:27.940 --> 00:33:31.940
It totally turned on its head, the natural rights philosophy of the founders, in my view.

286
00:33:31.940 --> 00:33:36.940
It's also a denial of private property, a severe attack on private property.

287
00:33:36.940 --> 00:33:41.940
Frank Chauterov said this as well as anybody ever has, I think, in his book, The Income Tax.

288
00:33:41.940 --> 00:33:45.940
He said, what it means is that your earnings are not exclusively your own.

289
00:33:45.940 --> 00:33:50.940
We, the government, have a claim on them, and our claim precedes yours.

290
00:33:50.940 --> 00:33:56.940
We will allow you to keep some of it, because we recognize your need, but not your rights.

291
00:33:56.940 --> 00:34:01.940
But whatever we grant you for yourself is for us to decide.

292
00:34:01.940 --> 00:34:07.940
You're essentially a slave, and the government will decide for you how much of your income you get to keep.

293
00:34:07.940 --> 00:34:10.940
It can change its mind on a whim if it wants.

294
00:34:10.940 --> 00:34:18.440
And, of course, the civil society always shrinks whenever government grows, and the income tax was the major driving force behind that.

295
00:34:18.440 --> 00:34:27.440
The capital structure of the country was permanently damaged since so much of the income that is taxed away would have been saved and invested.

296
00:34:27.440 --> 00:34:36.940
And the income tax created the high time preference society that America has been and has suffered from for decades now.

297
00:34:36.940 --> 00:34:47.500
And Murray Rothbard explained this in Man Economy and State of how the existence of income taxation causes an increase in the rate of time preference of the population.

298
00:34:47.500 --> 00:34:52.140
And I'll read this short section from Man Economy and State.

299
00:34:52.140 --> 00:34:57.840
An income tax will particularly penalize saving an investment as against consumption.

300
00:34:57.840 --> 00:35:03.620
It might be thought that since the income tax confiscates a certain portion of a man's income

301
00:35:03.620 --> 00:35:07.880
and leaves him free to allocate the rest between consumption and investment,

302
00:35:07.880 --> 00:35:10.920
and since time preference schedules remain given,

303
00:35:10.920 --> 00:35:14.720
the proportion of consumption to saving will remain unchanged.

304
00:35:14.720 --> 00:35:20.780
But this ignores the fact that the taxpayer's real income and the real value of his monetary assets

305
00:35:20.780 --> 00:35:23.520
have been lowered by paying the tax.

306
00:35:23.520 --> 00:35:37.120
We have seen that given a man's time preference schedule, the lower the level of his real monetary assets, the higher his time preference rate will be, and therefore the higher proportion of his consumption to investment.

307
00:35:37.120 --> 00:35:50.720
And so that's another thing that was set off by the advent of the income tax, the high time preference society that Hans Hoppe writes so eloquently about in his Democracy of the God that Failed.

308
00:35:50.720 --> 00:35:56.220
The third leg of the revolution of 1913, and I'm not going to go on and on about the Fed.

309
00:35:56.220 --> 00:36:00.220
This audience is pretty well-schooled on the Fed, I think.

310
00:36:00.220 --> 00:36:05.720
I could tell when I presented the image of chopping off the head of the Fed with a sword,

311
00:36:05.720 --> 00:36:08.220
and everybody laughed at the enjoyment of that.

312
00:36:08.220 --> 00:36:12.720
In D.C. you wouldn't get any laughter at all.

313
00:36:12.720 --> 00:36:18.720
But the story I would tell about the Fed, the creation of the Fed,

314
00:36:18.720 --> 00:36:23.720
is that it was a political struggle that began with Alexander Hamilton

315
00:36:23.720 --> 00:36:27.720
and his Bank of the United States and up through the Second Bank of the United States

316
00:36:27.720 --> 00:36:34.720
and Andrew Jackson's destruction of it, and then its resurrection of a central bank

317
00:36:34.720 --> 00:36:39.720
during the Lincoln administration with the National Currency Act and the Legal Tender Act

318
00:36:39.720 --> 00:36:44.720
and then it was expanded tremendously finally in 1913.

319
00:36:44.720 --> 00:36:58.220
So I see the creation of central banking in America as a part of this ongoing political struggle that occurred in invariably the advocates of some kind of a centralized bank,

320
00:36:58.220 --> 00:37:09.720
whether it was the Bank of the United States, the National Currency Acts of 1863, or the Fed itself, were advocates of bigger government, more activist government, more centralized government.

321
00:37:09.720 --> 00:37:17.720
Invariably, the opponents of a centralized bank were the advocates of liberty, limited government, decentralized government.

322
00:37:17.720 --> 00:37:23.720
And Richard Timberlake, in his book, In His Monetary Policy to the United States,

323
00:37:23.720 --> 00:37:31.720
has some interesting statements about the early battle over central banking between the Whigs, who were the precursors, part of the political apparatus,

324
00:37:31.720 --> 00:37:38.400
Apparatus were the precursors of the Republicans. Abraham Lincoln was a Whig for 28 years and

325
00:37:38.400 --> 00:37:43.080
a Republican for just a few years compared to that. And he said this about the Whigs.

326
00:37:43.080 --> 00:37:49.720
To the Whigs, a national bank was their life, the vital principle without which they could

327
00:37:49.720 --> 00:37:55.680
not live as a party, the power which was to give them power. To lose it was to lose the

328
00:37:55.680 --> 00:38:01.680
fruits of the election with the prospect of losing the party itself. That meant everything,

329
00:38:01.680 --> 00:38:12.680
and Centralized Power. And he also talks about Jackson, as does Robert Remini, the best biographer of Jackson and the Bank War.

330
00:38:12.680 --> 00:38:23.680
It's called Andrew Jackson and the Bank War by Robert Remini. He said this, that Jackson believed that the doctrine of states' rights meant that a central bank was unconstitutional.

331
00:38:23.680 --> 00:38:27.680
And this view was quite pervasive, especially in the South.

332
00:38:27.680 --> 00:38:31.680
And then Timberlake, I'm switching over to Timberlake again, where he writes,

333
00:38:31.680 --> 00:38:37.680
the states were properly jealous and fearful of encroachment by the federal government.

334
00:38:37.680 --> 00:38:41.680
Since a central bank would necessarily be a federal bank,

335
00:38:41.680 --> 00:38:45.680
and would maintain and operate state branches from a distant center,

336
00:38:45.680 --> 00:38:51.680
proponents of states' rights found opposition to a national bank almost mandatory.

337
00:38:51.680 --> 00:39:04.680
And so, from the early days, you had this mandatory political battle between the advocates of Hamiltonianism, centralized governmental power, and the advocates of Jeffersonianism.

338
00:39:04.680 --> 00:39:18.680
And when Lincoln's banking legislation, which was the real precursor of the Fed, came online, the sponsor of the bill for the National Currency Act was Congressman Elbridge G. Spaulding, a New York banker, by the way.

339
00:39:18.680 --> 00:39:23.880
What a coincidence. He happened to be a banker. He's the sponsor of the Nationalized Banking Act.

340
00:39:26.880 --> 00:39:34.880
He was interviewed apparently by the New York Times, which said this on March 9th, 1863, about these acts.

341
00:39:34.880 --> 00:39:35.880
It said,

342
00:39:35.880 --> 00:39:41.480
The Legal Tender Act and the National Currency Bill crystallized a centralization of power,

343
00:39:41.480 --> 00:39:44.880
such as Hamilton might have eulogized as magnificent.

344
00:39:44.880 --> 00:39:53.120
One of the big opponents at the time of centralized banking was Kentucky Democrat Lazarus Powell,

345
00:39:53.120 --> 00:39:56.560
who wasn't quite as enthusiastic about this.

346
00:39:56.560 --> 00:40:00.920
He said this, he said, the result of this legislation is utterly to destroy the rights

347
00:40:00.920 --> 00:40:01.920
of the states.

348
00:40:01.920 --> 00:40:06.440
It is asserting a power which if carried out to its logical result would enable the

349
00:40:06.440 --> 00:40:12.360
National Congress to destroy every institution of the states and cause all power to be consolidated

350
00:40:12.360 --> 00:40:19.080
and concentrated here in Washington, and of course he was dead-on on that, wasn't he?

351
00:40:19.080 --> 00:40:27.380
There's an author named Richardson who wrote a book called The Greatest Government on the

352
00:40:27.380 --> 00:40:35.760
Earth about the Congress during the Lincoln administration, and since they passed the

353
00:40:35.760 --> 00:40:40.760
National Currency Act and subsidies for the Transcontinental Railroad and protectionist

354
00:40:40.760 --> 00:40:47.760
Tariffs, that qualifies them as the greatest government on the earth. And she said this about the Banking Act.

355
00:40:47.760 --> 00:40:54.760
By 1863, the Republicans envisioned a dominant international role for a unified American nation.

356
00:40:54.760 --> 00:41:03.760
And Senator John Sherman promised that the bank bill, with its implicit strengthening of the national government, would advance that goal.

357
00:41:03.760 --> 00:41:15.760
The Republicans were building a new economic role for an increasingly powerful national government, permanently involving it in the country's monetary affairs.

358
00:41:15.760 --> 00:41:22.760
And so they wanted imperialism, they wanted empire, and it takes a lot of money to have an empire.

359
00:41:22.760 --> 00:41:29.760
And of course, the Fed expanded this in spades 48 years later with the Fed.

360
00:41:29.760 --> 00:41:36.460
It was bad enough in the National Currency Acts and Legal Tender Acts, but the Fed was just a tremendous expansion of this.

361
00:41:36.460 --> 00:41:41.960
One of the books I've read recently on the history of the income tax, one of the authors says,

362
00:41:41.960 --> 00:41:51.760
thank goodness that we adopted the income tax and the Fed in 1913, otherwise America may not have been able to enter World War I.

363
00:41:51.760 --> 00:41:56.960
What a disaster that would have been.

364
00:41:56.960 --> 00:42:02.960
That's that idea that the war just came, that the individuals have nothing to do with getting us in the war.

365
00:42:02.960 --> 00:42:10.960
They just come and go like traffic, the tides in the ocean, no human action involved here.

366
00:42:10.960 --> 00:42:21.960
So in closing, on the significance of this, I think these three things were the final nails in the coffin of the whole system of federalism or states' rights

367
00:42:21.960 --> 00:42:25.960
that was meant to constrain the central government.

368
00:42:25.960 --> 00:42:32.960
To the extent that the Americans were meant to be the masters rather than the servants of their own government,

369
00:42:32.960 --> 00:42:39.960
this is how they were meant to be the masters of their own government, through political communities organized at the state level.

370
00:42:39.960 --> 00:42:42.960
Whether you like it or not, that was the system.

371
00:42:42.960 --> 00:42:53.960
And one of the things about this is that that was the way in which limited constitutional government was supposed to operate here, in this country.

372
00:42:53.960 --> 00:43:12.800
And of course, countries all over the world have adopted federalism, one author, Horace McDonald, who wrote a book on states' rights not too long ago, pointed out the irony that this was an American idea, and it does exist in countries all over the world, but not here anymore, even though it was invented here. We got rid of it.

373
00:43:12.800 --> 00:43:22.800
And I want to close with a quotation from Ludwig von Mises here and another German language political philosopher.

374
00:43:22.800 --> 00:43:25.440
I want to ask you to guess who the second one is.

375
00:43:25.440 --> 00:43:38.560
But in Omnipotent Government, on page 268, Mises is talking about the growth of government in both America and Switzerland in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

376
00:43:38.560 --> 00:43:42.000
And here's what he says about the growth of government, in Omnipotent Government.

377
00:43:42.000 --> 00:43:51.000
New powers accrued in these years not to member states, meaning individual states, provinces, but to the federal government.

378
00:43:51.000 --> 00:43:59.000
Every step toward more government interference and toward more planning means at the same time an expansion of the jurisdiction of the central government.

379
00:43:59.000 --> 00:44:04.000
Washington and Bern were once the seats of the federal government.

380
00:44:04.000 --> 00:44:08.800
Today they are capitals in the true sense of the word, and the states and cantons are

381
00:44:08.800 --> 00:44:15.680
virtually reduced to the status of provinces. It is a very significant fact that the adversaries

382
00:44:15.680 --> 00:44:20.600
of the trend toward more government control describe their opposition as a fight against

383
00:44:20.600 --> 00:44:27.300
Washington and against Bern, i.e. against centralization. It is conceived as a contest

384
00:44:27.300 --> 00:44:31.540
of States' Rights vs. the Central Power."

385
00:44:31.540 --> 00:44:39.040
So to Mises, the whole battle for liberty was a contest of states' rights vs. the centralized

386
00:44:39.040 --> 00:44:40.220
government.

387
00:44:40.220 --> 00:44:45.380
And there's a German political philosopher, some of you may be familiar with this philosopher,

388
00:44:45.380 --> 00:44:51.540
I know we have at least one or two real experts in this, just to contrast the kind of thinking

389
00:44:51.540 --> 00:44:54.320
that this was a contemporary of Mises.

390
00:44:54.320 --> 00:44:59.600
He died quite a long time before Mises died, but he was a contemporary of Mises, a very

391
00:44:59.600 --> 00:45:06.520
influential one, for quite some time, where he said this, commenting on American history,

392
00:45:06.520 --> 00:45:11.680
this German philosopher said, the individual states of the American Union could not have

393
00:45:11.680 --> 00:45:16.920
possessed any sovereignty of their own, for it was not these states that formed the Union.

394
00:45:16.920 --> 00:45:22.040
On the contrary, it was the Union which formed a great part of the so-called states.

395
00:45:22.040 --> 00:45:25.840
So he's saying that state sovereignty never really existed in America because the Union

396
00:45:25.840 --> 00:45:28.440
created the states, the states didn't create the Union.

397
00:45:28.440 --> 00:45:30.120
This is the German philosopher.

398
00:45:30.120 --> 00:45:36.440
He's paraphrasing Abraham Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, and this is what Lincoln's

399
00:45:36.440 --> 00:45:40.880
First Inaugural Address says, the Union is much older than the Constitution.

400
00:45:40.880 --> 00:45:47.000
It was formed, in fact, by the Articles of Association in 1774, it was matured and continued

401
00:45:47.000 --> 00:45:51.920
by the Declaration of Independence, it was further matured by the Articles of Confederation

402
00:45:51.920 --> 00:46:00.000
And finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects for ordaining and establishing the Constitution was to form a more perfect union.

403
00:46:00.000 --> 00:46:07.480
So this German philosopher was just quoting Abraham Lincoln in making the case for abolishing state sovereignty in Germany.

404
00:46:07.480 --> 00:46:15.880
And of course, this is complete nonsense because you think about a union of two things cannot logically be older than either of the things.

405
00:46:15.880 --> 00:46:22.440
It's like saying a marital union can be older than either spouse, either part of the union.

406
00:46:22.440 --> 00:46:26.680
It doesn't make any sense. Besides the fact, it's not historical. It didn't happen that way.

407
00:46:26.680 --> 00:46:32.760
The same German philosopher said this, that the ideal thing for Germany would, quote,

408
00:46:32.760 --> 00:46:38.600
totally eliminate states' rights altogether, since for us the state as such is only a form,

409
00:46:38.600 --> 00:46:44.680
but the essential is its content, the nation, the people, real nationalists, this fellow was.

410
00:46:44.680 --> 00:46:49.240
It is clear that everything else must be subordinated to its sovereign interests.

411
00:46:49.240 --> 00:46:53.520
In particular, we cannot grant to any individual state within the nation,

412
00:46:53.520 --> 00:46:58.880
and the state representing it, state sovereignty and sovereignty and point of political power.

413
00:46:58.880 --> 00:47:03.880
The mischief of individual federated states must cease.

414
00:47:03.880 --> 00:47:07.120
Any guess who that was?

415
00:47:07.120 --> 00:47:10.920
That was Adolf Hitler in Mein Kampf.

416
00:47:10.920 --> 00:47:15.600
Just to make the point that the worst tyrants in world history were also on the side of

417
00:47:15.600 --> 00:47:18.840
centralized power and enemies of states' rights.

418
00:47:18.840 --> 00:47:22.920
And I think the final thing I would say is that this was America's attempt at limited

419
00:47:22.920 --> 00:47:27.800
constitutional government, and the way I see it as, as soon as the central government became

420
00:47:27.800 --> 00:47:32.800
powerful enough to destroy state sovereignty, it did.

421
00:47:32.800 --> 00:47:36.280
When the southern states attempted to say, we no longer consent to being governed by

422
00:47:36.280 --> 00:47:38.000
by the Central Government.

423
00:47:38.000 --> 00:47:40.720
The Central Government responded by killing 300,000

424
00:47:40.720 --> 00:47:44.420
of the one out of four adult males of military age,

425
00:47:44.420 --> 00:47:47.400
bombing their cities, burning out their homes and farms,

426
00:47:47.400 --> 00:47:49.580
and generally ruining the whole society.

427
00:47:51.600 --> 00:47:53.160
We can talk more about that.

428
00:47:53.160 --> 00:47:55.080
And then the final nails in that coffin

429
00:47:55.080 --> 00:47:57.920
were pounded in 1913, in my view.

430
00:47:57.920 --> 00:48:00.200
And so that's pretty strong evidence

431
00:48:00.200 --> 00:48:03.280
that limited constitutional government just won't work.

432
00:48:03.280 --> 00:48:09.160
and had as good a chance here as anywhere, but it was destroyed, it took a while, but

433
00:48:09.160 --> 00:48:16.720
it was destroyed not that long really, 1789 until 1913 in the span of history, it's not

434
00:48:16.720 --> 00:48:18.240
that long a time period.