WEBVTT

NOTE The Classical Liberal States' Rights Tradition

1
00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:29.960
My topic today, and this is the last direct topic that has anything to do with Lincoln or the war to prevent southern independence, as I call it, is the classical liberal states' rights tradition, and the phrase states' rights is sometimes used synonymously with federalism, decentralized governments, basically it means essentially the same thing.

2
00:00:30.000 --> 00:00:51.000
And a lot of people have a misconception of what it is because the whole study of states' rights philosophically and in political science literature has been pretty much ignored for a long, long time, if not ignored, misrepresented.

3
00:00:51.000 --> 00:00:56.000
Some people have asked me questions in light of my Lincoln writings.

4
00:00:56.000 --> 00:01:02.000
They'll say things like, well, the South, or the Confederate government,

5
00:01:02.000 --> 00:01:06.000
or somebody in the South will mention some prominent politician.

6
00:01:06.000 --> 00:01:10.000
He voted in favor of some federal law, and they'll name some federal law.

7
00:01:10.000 --> 00:01:15.000
And they'll say, how can you square that with his support of states' rights?

8
00:01:15.000 --> 00:01:17.000
And the answer is easy.

9
00:01:17.000 --> 00:01:23.000
The so-called states' rights had nothing to do with opposition to all federal law.

10
00:01:23.000 --> 00:01:32.000
I think of the original, one of the most famous originators of this idea of states' rights as being Thomas Jefferson.

11
00:01:32.000 --> 00:01:41.000
You know, long before Lincoln or Jefferson Davis or any of these people came onto the scene, it was Jefferson.

12
00:01:41.000 --> 00:01:59.000
And the basic idea, which was also shared by Madison as a young man, was that the citizens of the states ought to have the sovereignty invested in them, sovereignty over government invested in them.

13
00:01:59.000 --> 00:02:14.000
and that they ought to have some vehicle, if they're going to have a central government, they have to have some vehicle for deciding whether or not what the central government is doing is legitimate or not, is constitutional or not.

14
00:02:14.000 --> 00:02:20.000
It doesn't mean there should be no federal legislation or you're totally opposed to having a federal government.

15
00:02:20.000 --> 00:02:25.000
It never meant that in the eyes of Jefferson, Madison or anywhere else.

16
00:02:25.000 --> 00:02:30.120
In fact, the way Madison described it was dual sovereignty.

17
00:02:30.120 --> 00:02:37.160
He used the phrase dual sovereignty and what he meant was that the original system of government

18
00:02:37.160 --> 00:02:43.400
set up by the American founders, well, they delegated certain powers to the central government

19
00:02:43.400 --> 00:02:50.800
and in theory, the whole purpose of government was supposed to be to protect the lives, liberties

20
00:02:50.800 --> 00:02:55.920
and Properties of the People, Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness is the way they set it.

21
00:02:56.720 --> 00:03:02.480
And sometimes that would involve protecting the citizens from state and local tyrannies.

22
00:03:03.280 --> 00:03:11.360
But where the duality comes in is the lion's share of governmental authority, if you will,

23
00:03:11.360 --> 00:03:16.560
governmental functions was to be left at the state and local levels because they always

24
00:03:16.560 --> 00:03:24.560
I always understood that the biggest threat to freedom, the wolf at the door, as I put it recently, would be the central government.

25
00:03:24.560 --> 00:03:31.560
That would always be the big threat to freedom. Petty local tyrannies are bad enough, but you always have an exit.

26
00:03:31.560 --> 00:03:37.560
You don't have to live in a particular town, city, state. You have options.

27
00:03:37.560 --> 00:03:42.560
But with the central government, the options are much more scarce. You have to leave the entire country.

28
00:03:42.560 --> 00:03:48.320
And so the real threat to tyranny would always come mostly from the central government.

29
00:03:48.320 --> 00:03:58.440
And so the 10th Amendment, for example, gives everything that is not the responsibility of the central government is left up to the citizens and the states respectively.

30
00:03:58.440 --> 00:04:04.640
And that is how they were to control what the central government did.

31
00:04:04.640 --> 00:04:08.880
It's called dual sovereignty, another word for states' rights.

32
00:04:08.880 --> 00:04:16.960
Now, of course, since the 1860s, this has been pretty much ignored, associated with

33
00:04:16.960 --> 00:04:23.240
racism or slavery, which is a sort of a rhetorical gimmick that's used because, of course, certainly

34
00:04:23.240 --> 00:04:29.000
in Jefferson's day, it had nothing to do with that at all.

35
00:04:29.000 --> 00:04:35.080
And so that's the topic for today, the truth about states' rights.

36
00:04:35.080 --> 00:04:39.200
And I might as well, this handout that I gave you, this is section one of the Kentucky Resolve

37
00:04:39.200 --> 00:04:40.200
of 1798.

38
00:04:40.200 --> 00:04:49.660
And what this is was when the Adams Administration, John Adams Administration passed, with the

39
00:04:49.660 --> 00:04:56.160
Congress passed the Alien and Sedition Acts, it made it literally illegal to criticize

40
00:04:56.160 --> 00:04:57.160
the government.

41
00:04:57.160 --> 00:04:58.160
It was illegal.

42
00:04:58.160 --> 00:05:03.760
You could be thrown in prison for criticizing the Adams Administration and the law applied

43
00:05:03.760 --> 00:05:10.200
applied to the vice president, who was Thomas Jefferson at the time, didn't apply to, and

44
00:05:10.200 --> 00:05:16.800
there were prosecutions, but the only people ever prosecuted under the Sedition Act were

45
00:05:16.800 --> 00:05:23.300
members of Jefferson's political party, nobody who was a member of the opposing party or

46
00:05:23.300 --> 00:05:26.720
any other party was ever prosecuted under this.

47
00:05:26.720 --> 00:05:32.420
And it literally did make it illegal to criticize the government, so it was a censorship law.

48
00:05:32.420 --> 00:05:38.220
And so, you know, here's this relatively new central government making criticism of the

49
00:05:38.220 --> 00:05:39.220
government illegal.

50
00:05:39.220 --> 00:05:42.340
You know, what could be more illiberal than that?

51
00:05:42.340 --> 00:05:47.860
And of course, people like Jefferson were tremendously alarmed at this.

52
00:05:47.860 --> 00:05:54.260
And so what Jefferson did was he authored this Kentucky Resolve, which is much longer

53
00:05:54.260 --> 00:05:55.260
than this.

54
00:05:55.260 --> 00:05:56.940
This is just the first section.

55
00:05:56.940 --> 00:06:01.340
And he did it anonymously at first, but then later on he admitted that he was the author.

56
00:06:01.340 --> 00:06:07.980
James Madison authored something that is almost identical to this, called the Virginia Resolution

57
00:06:07.980 --> 00:06:11.860
of 1798.

58
00:06:11.860 --> 00:06:17.300
You can read it as well as I can, but this was a response to the Sedition Act, which

59
00:06:17.300 --> 00:06:20.620
made it illegal to criticize the central government.

60
00:06:20.620 --> 00:06:25.540
It resolved that the several states composed of the United States of America are not united

61
00:06:25.540 --> 00:06:29.580
on the principles of unlimited submission to their general government.

62
00:06:29.580 --> 00:06:31.260
How about that?

63
00:06:31.260 --> 00:07:01.260
by that compact, under the style and title of a constitution for the United States and of amendments thereto, they constituted a general government for special purposes, delegated to that government certain dividend powers, reserving each state to itself the residuary mass of right to their own self-government, and that whenever the general government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void and of no force. And so this is the best statement I know of.

64
00:07:01.260 --> 00:07:08.860
of what states' rights meant to people like Jefferson and Madison and other people at the time.

65
00:07:08.860 --> 00:07:15.420
It didn't mean opposition to all federal law, it didn't mean defense of slavery and so forth.

66
00:07:15.420 --> 00:07:22.060
You see, the advocates of unlimited centralized governmental power have used this language of

67
00:07:22.060 --> 00:07:31.180
racist defense of slavery to demean and denigrate the idea that the citizens can have some control

68
00:07:31.180 --> 00:07:40.180
They don't want the citizens to have control over their central government, and so therefore they have done this for generations.

69
00:07:40.180 --> 00:07:55.180
They have propagandized against this, and they've been so effective in doing this that it was a hundred years before a book would be written on this.

70
00:07:55.180 --> 00:08:01.180
Reclaiming the American Revolution by William J. Watkins

71
00:08:25.180 --> 00:08:31.380
creeping out of the the dustbin of history here. And one of the points I'd

72
00:08:31.380 --> 00:08:35.980
like to make about this is that this understanding of the Federal Compact,

73
00:08:35.980 --> 00:08:41.080
this understanding, was understood by citizens north and south. This was not,

74
00:08:41.080 --> 00:08:47.020
since it came from Jefferson and Madison, it was not just a Virginia thing or

75
00:08:47.020 --> 00:08:52.060
southern states rights thing. It was north and south. For example, when

76
00:08:52.060 --> 00:08:59.880
When Jefferson became president, the British started confiscating American ships.

77
00:08:59.880 --> 00:09:08.360
They were at war with France and they started conscripting sailors for their Navy and stealing

78
00:09:08.360 --> 00:09:11.160
American ships.

79
00:09:11.160 --> 00:09:16.280
Jefferson didn't know what to do about it other than to impose a trade embargo prohibiting

80
00:09:16.280 --> 00:09:20.200
ships from engaging in the transatlantic trade.

81
00:09:20.200 --> 00:09:27.040
And this was horribly harmful to the New England economy, which was very much trade dependent.

82
00:09:27.040 --> 00:09:35.240
And so the New Englanders responded to this by using Jefferson's own language from the

83
00:09:35.240 --> 00:09:40.000
Kentucky resolve to say that we are not going to abide by the trademark, we are going to

84
00:09:40.000 --> 00:09:45.000
continue trading with the Europeans and take our chances out there.

85
00:09:45.000 --> 00:09:51.700
And so both houses of the Massachusetts legislature issued formal denunciations of this trade

86
00:09:51.700 --> 00:09:58.720
embargo, denouncing it, they called it, quote, unjust, oppressive and unconstitutional.

87
00:09:58.720 --> 00:10:02.640
While this state maintains its sovereignty and independence, there's that sovereignty

88
00:10:02.640 --> 00:10:07.960
and independence again, they didn't say anything about the whole people, imagine that.

89
00:10:07.960 --> 00:10:12.800
All the citizens can find protection against outrage and injustice in the strong arm of

90
00:10:12.800 --> 00:10:18.520
of State Government, and they said the embargo was, quote, was not legally binding on the

91
00:10:18.520 --> 00:10:24.480
citizens of the state of Massachusetts. So they nullified it, just like the South Carolinians

92
00:10:24.480 --> 00:10:30.600
issued this statement that nullified the tariff of abominations, which I talked about yesterday.

93
00:10:30.600 --> 00:10:35.480
This was long before that. The South Carolinians were doing what people in Massachusetts did

94
00:10:35.480 --> 00:10:50.480
The State of Connecticut said that this embargo law is, quote, incompatible with the Constitution of the United States and encroaches upon the immunities of the state.

95
00:10:50.480 --> 00:11:00.480
And then its legislature directed all state government officials, quote, to deny any official aid or cooperation in the execution of the act.

96
00:11:00.480 --> 00:11:16.980
The Act aforesaid Rhode Island issued a similar proclamation. Then when the War of 1812 broke out, the same New England Federalists, the Federalist Party, they considered this to be mostly a dispute between Jefferson's party and the British.

97
00:11:16.980 --> 00:11:27.480
That's what they said anyway. And they did everything they could to disassociate themselves from the war and to not participate in the War of 1812.

98
00:11:27.480 --> 00:11:36.480
The Connecticut State Assembly said this, paraphrasing this Kentucky resolve once again, they said,

99
00:11:36.480 --> 00:11:42.480
but it must not be forgotten that the state of Connecticut is a free, sovereign, and independent state.

100
00:11:42.480 --> 00:11:47.480
And they spell the words free, sovereign, and independent in big capital letters.

101
00:11:47.480 --> 00:11:52.480
Maybe I'll show you how, I'll pull this off here and show you how it looks.

102
00:11:57.480 --> 00:12:02.480
Right there, my finger is. And that's in the original. I didn't add the big capital letters.

103
00:12:02.480 --> 00:12:05.480
That was in the original, Free, Sovereign and Independent State.

104
00:12:05.480 --> 00:12:17.120
And that the United States are a confederated and not a consolidated republic, that's totally

105
00:12:17.120 --> 00:12:21.560
the opposite of the Lincoln theory of the Gettysburg Address.

106
00:12:21.560 --> 00:12:25.480
The governor of this state is under a high and solemn obligation to maintain the lawful

107
00:12:25.480 --> 00:12:31.160
rights and privileges thereof as a sovereign, free and independent state, as he is to support

108
00:12:31.160 --> 00:12:33.400
of the Constitution of the United States.

109
00:12:33.400 --> 00:12:35.360
And the obligation to support the latter

110
00:12:35.360 --> 00:12:38.520
imposes an additional obligation to support the former.

111
00:12:38.520 --> 00:12:40.680
And the building cannot stand if the pillars

112
00:12:40.680 --> 00:12:43.280
upon which it rests are impaired or destroyed.

113
00:12:43.280 --> 00:12:45.960
So they were saying that the rights of the states

114
00:12:45.960 --> 00:12:50.320
are the pillars of American liberty, and that comes first.

115
00:12:50.320 --> 00:12:53.520
You can't have liberty protected by the US Constitution

116
00:12:53.520 --> 00:12:56.880
unless you also have the other, the dual sovereignty.

117
00:12:56.880 --> 00:12:59.560
That was their expression of Madison's dual sovereignty,

118
00:12:59.560 --> 00:13:00.680
I think.

119
00:13:00.680 --> 00:13:12.680
And so, it was north and south, it was northern states as well as southern states that adopted and embraced this doctrine of states' rights and had nothing to do with slavery, racism or anything like that.

120
00:13:12.680 --> 00:13:28.680
The New England Federalists were so outraged with Jefferson, they so disliked Jefferson, they compared him to the devil, and the New England ministers did, and worse, that they plotted to secede.

121
00:13:28.680 --> 00:13:38.680
There was a New England secession movement that lasted for about 10 years that ended up in a secession convention in Hartford, Connecticut in 1814.

122
00:13:38.680 --> 00:13:46.680
And they voted against secession, but there was never any question of whether secession was legal or not.

123
00:13:46.680 --> 00:13:53.680
The only debate was over, is this a wise thing politically and economically for us to secede from the United States?

124
00:13:53.680 --> 00:13:59.620
of States, but there was never any question over the right of secession, and it was led

125
00:13:59.620 --> 00:14:06.520
by Senator Timothy Pickering of Massachusetts, who was George Washington's adjutant general

126
00:14:06.520 --> 00:14:11.320
during the American Revolution. He also served as George Washington's secretary of war and

127
00:14:11.320 --> 00:14:17.000
secretary of state, and he was also the secretary of state in the John Adams administration.

128
00:14:17.000 --> 00:14:21.680
So this was not some crackpot. He may have been a crackpot, he was a politician after

129
00:14:21.680 --> 00:14:28.140
for All, but he held some pretty high-level jobs, and he was the leader of the New England

130
00:14:28.140 --> 00:14:33.160
secession movement, and it has to be one of the reasons why the Southern Confederates

131
00:14:33.160 --> 00:14:37.920
thought, well, naturally, this is a right that all states have. The New Englanders, you

132
00:14:37.920 --> 00:14:43.200
know, who are now criticizing us assume they have that right. Why don't we have that right?

133
00:14:43.200 --> 00:14:51.000
Another example of the use of this state's rights logic was when Andrew Jackson had a

134
00:14:51.000 --> 00:14:56.040
a big dispute with the Bank of the United States in the late 1820s. He wanted to defund this. He

135
00:14:56.040 --> 00:15:02.120
didn't trust a central bank run by politicians in the nation's capital, and he eventually won that

136
00:15:02.120 --> 00:15:08.040
debate. But the states played a very important part in that, and I alluded to that briefly yesterday.

137
00:15:09.560 --> 00:15:13.400
When the Bank of the United States opened up two branches in Ohio,

138
00:15:13.400 --> 00:15:26.400
The State of Ohio imposed a tax of $50,000 a year per branch to try to tax the Bank of the United States out of its borders, to bankrupt it and get out of there.

139
00:15:26.400 --> 00:15:35.400
It also issued resolutions that were kind of similar to these resolutions from Connecticut and Massachusetts regarding the embargo in the early 1800s.

140
00:15:35.400 --> 00:15:50.400
The Ohio Legislature said this, the states have an equal right to interpret the Constitution for themselves, and then after that they withdrew the protection and aid of the laws of the state from the bank.

141
00:15:50.400 --> 00:16:00.400
And that's kind of scary if you're a banker, the state legislature is saying we're withdrawing the protection of the laws of our state from your bank, that's sort of inviting bank robbers right in.

142
00:16:00.400 --> 00:16:09.400
Indiana and Illinois did the same thing to try to kick the Bank of the United States out as did Maryland and other states.

143
00:16:09.400 --> 00:16:16.400
There's a real interesting story in the book by James Kilpatrick that I mentioned this morning called The Sovereign States.

144
00:16:16.400 --> 00:16:23.400
He tells this whole story in great detail of the confrontation between the State of Ohio and the Bank of the United States

145
00:16:23.400 --> 00:16:29.400
and how the state of Ohio invoked the states' rights doctrine, the Jeffersonian states' rights doctrine

146
00:16:29.400 --> 00:16:33.400
to make its case against this bank, which it did not want to exist.

147
00:16:33.400 --> 00:16:40.400
And the story he tells is sort of an amusing part of it, I'll read you the amusing part, I think it's amusing anyway.

148
00:16:40.400 --> 00:16:42.400
Here's what the state of Ohio did.

149
00:16:42.400 --> 00:16:52.400
On the morning of September 17th, a man named John L. Harper was sent to collect the taxes at the Bank of the United States,

150
00:16:52.400 --> 00:16:54.960
to the United States, which was a precursor to the Fed.

151
00:16:56.220 --> 00:16:59.900
Harper made one last request for voluntary payment.

152
00:16:59.900 --> 00:17:02.740
When this was denied, he leaped over the counter,

153
00:17:02.740 --> 00:17:04.280
strode into the bank vaults,

154
00:17:04.280 --> 00:17:08.520
and helped himself to $100,000 in paper and specie.

155
00:17:08.520 --> 00:17:10.780
He then turned this over to a deputy,

156
00:17:10.780 --> 00:17:14.220
stuffing this considerable hoard into a small trunk,

157
00:17:14.220 --> 00:17:17.140
which the party thoughtfully had come equipped.

158
00:17:17.140 --> 00:17:20.300
The trunk, and they put $100,000 in a trunk.

159
00:17:20.300 --> 00:17:26.700
So they were serious about getting rid of the Bank of the United States, and which they eventually did.

160
00:17:26.700 --> 00:17:35.500
Andrew Jackson did succeed, but he had a great deal of help from the citizens of the states invoking the Jeffersonian Kentucky Resolve Doctrine.

161
00:17:35.500 --> 00:17:45.900
Some northern states also invoked this nullification idea to drag their feet or to not enforce the Fugitive Slave Act,

162
00:17:45.900 --> 00:17:53.980
a law that Lincoln supported very strongly, and the Fugitive Slave Act, there were several

163
00:17:53.980 --> 00:17:58.420
of them that were passed over the decades, but the Fugitive Slave Act, the last one was

164
00:17:58.420 --> 00:18:04.660
passed in 1850, it essentially conscripted citizens of northern states to capture runaway

165
00:18:04.660 --> 00:18:07.020
slaves and return them to their owners.

166
00:18:07.020 --> 00:18:10.780
That's why the famous Underground Railroad ended up in Canada.

167
00:18:10.780 --> 00:18:20.300
If you escaped from Mississippi and ended up in Pennsylvania, you had a federal bounty

168
00:18:20.300 --> 00:18:28.260
on your head, and the magistrates in the northern states were paid $10 for deciding that a captured

169
00:18:28.260 --> 00:18:31.220
slave should be brought back to his owner.

170
00:18:31.220 --> 00:18:34.940
They were paid $5 if they decided he should be set free.

171
00:18:34.940 --> 00:18:38.980
So again, there's that understanding of economic incentives that was put in there.

172
00:18:38.980 --> 00:18:44.380
And so, and some of the northern states were not enforcing this and they invoked the Jeffersonian

173
00:18:44.380 --> 00:18:50.260
dictum of nullification because they were saying we think this is unconstitutional therefore

174
00:18:50.260 --> 00:18:52.780
we're not going to enforce this.

175
00:18:52.780 --> 00:18:59.460
And I mentioned earlier that Lincoln supported the Fugitive Slave Act, they were not enforcing,

176
00:18:59.460 --> 00:19:04.260
and in the early days of his administration he instructed William Seward to get a new

177
00:19:04.260 --> 00:19:10.260
New law passed through Congress that would nullify these New England nullifiers, that

178
00:19:10.260 --> 00:19:17.700
would make it a federal law against nullifying the Fugitive Slave Act, complete with criminal

179
00:19:17.700 --> 00:19:24.620
penalties involved for anybody who attempted to not enforce the Fugitive Slave Act.

180
00:19:24.620 --> 00:19:28.380
So this was widely accepted north and south.

181
00:19:28.380 --> 00:19:30.860
That's the first point I wanted to make about this.

182
00:19:30.860 --> 00:19:57.860
It was not just a Southern thing, and it kind of infuriates me when I read people like Harry Jaffe, who I mentioned earlier, saying, making statements that this idea was invented out of thin air by John C. Calhoun as a defense of slavery, that it is simply an insidious lie. It's just not true by any stretch of the imagination. It came long before that.

183
00:19:57.860 --> 00:20:27.860
So that's point number one about what states' rights is and how it was widely accepted everywhere. Point number two is that I'd like to make this afternoon is why it is that so many conservatives especially and some libertarians are really sort of acting in a sort of a like Don Quixote when they wave the Constitution around and pledge their allegiance to the Constitution

184
00:20:27.860 --> 00:20:39.860
and they're constantly telling us this should be looked at as a sacred document and if only the government would enforce this constitution, we would all live as free citizens and so on and so forth.

185
00:20:39.860 --> 00:20:50.860
The Cato Institute publishes a little pocket-sized version of the constitution. Everyone here has probably received one. They have mass mailing. They mail them to everybody all the time.

186
00:20:50.860 --> 00:20:58.700
The underlying assumption seems to be that, well, if enough people read the actual Constitution,

187
00:20:58.700 --> 00:21:05.540
that they will somehow pressure our politicians to enforce the Constitution.

188
00:21:05.540 --> 00:21:10.700
And that would mean eliminating at least 95% of the federal government today, I would think,

189
00:21:10.700 --> 00:21:14.380
if they actually did live by the Constitution.

190
00:21:14.380 --> 00:21:16.060
But how is that supposed to happen?

191
00:21:16.060 --> 00:21:18.020
How is this supposed to be enforced?

192
00:21:18.020 --> 00:21:21.220
How on earth is this constituted?

193
00:21:21.220 --> 00:21:25.020
The Congress now just ridicules the Constitution.

194
00:21:25.020 --> 00:21:28.420
I gave a talk before Ron Paul's group in Congress.

195
00:21:28.420 --> 00:21:30.060
He has something called the Liberty Caucus,

196
00:21:30.060 --> 00:21:32.860
and he claims to have 20 or 25 members or so,

197
00:21:32.860 --> 00:21:35.460
and about 10 or 12 of them showed up.

198
00:21:35.460 --> 00:21:37.140
And I gave a talk on my Lincoln book.

199
00:21:37.140 --> 00:21:41.940
It's very, very kind of strange to see all these members

200
00:21:41.940 --> 00:21:46.100
of Congress walking around the House Office Building

201
00:21:46.100 --> 00:21:57.100
The Liberty Caucus of 10 or 12 members of the United States Congress

202
00:21:57.100 --> 00:22:05.100
At one point, one of them said, you can no longer make constitutional arguments here in Congress against government programs.

203
00:22:05.100 --> 00:22:08.100
You're not taken seriously at all, and everyone just ignores you.

204
00:22:08.100 --> 00:22:10.100
And they all shook their head, yes, that's true.

205
00:22:10.100 --> 00:22:14.660
and so it's a dead letter it's a they'll use the Constitution if it can be used

206
00:22:14.660 --> 00:22:18.880
some way to expand state power but but they won't use it to limit state power

207
00:22:18.880 --> 00:22:25.540
anyway they just laugh at you and I've seen I was what I can recall flipping

208
00:22:25.540 --> 00:22:29.540
the channels one night when I couldn't sleep and the C-SPAN was there and an

209
00:22:29.540 --> 00:22:33.740
old acquaintance of mine Roger Pilon who works at the Cato Institute was on some

210
00:22:33.740 --> 00:22:38.340
hearing and before the US Senate committee and he was making a

211
00:22:38.340 --> 00:22:41.340
the Constitutional Argument Against Some Government Program

212
00:22:41.340 --> 00:22:48.340
and if I recall right, it was Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama at the time

213
00:22:48.340 --> 00:22:55.340
who just looked at Pilon and said, we have the power to do this and so we're going to do it.

214
00:22:55.340 --> 00:22:58.340
And he was pretty much saying, the hell with the Constitution.

215
00:22:58.340 --> 00:23:03.340
Here's Roger with all his research and his law degrees and his constitutional arguments

216
00:23:03.340 --> 00:23:07.340
and he just said, we have the guns, therefore we're going to do it.

217
00:23:07.340 --> 00:23:37.340
It's sort of similar to people who often ask me questions about my opinion on the legality of the income tax, and my usual response is, it doesn't matter what the legalistic arguments are about whether the income tax is constitutional or not, the government has enough guns with which to enforce income tax collection, therefore, you have to pay the income tax. It doesn't matter what the law says or what the Constitution, how it came about constitutionally, that's sort of a moot issue.

218
00:23:37.340 --> 00:23:47.340
And if you think about it, just think of the political incentives, this idea that the Constitution will be enforced by someone.

219
00:23:47.340 --> 00:23:55.340
How is this going to happen? You have a classic case of concentrated benefits and dispersed costs,

220
00:23:55.340 --> 00:24:04.340
where the people who benefit from bigger and bigger government programs, they all have a very strong interest to lobby for, argue for,

221
00:24:04.340 --> 00:24:07.740
for Bigger Government, because they are the beneficiaries.

222
00:24:07.740 --> 00:24:08.580
Who are the losers?

223
00:24:08.580 --> 00:24:11.140
Well, it's generally the general public,

224
00:24:11.140 --> 00:24:15.660
who have to pay for all this and don't benefit necessarily

225
00:24:15.660 --> 00:24:18.460
from the sugar program and things like that,

226
00:24:18.460 --> 00:24:20.780
sugar price supports, for example.

227
00:24:20.780 --> 00:24:23.260
And it's something that's been known

228
00:24:23.260 --> 00:24:25.820
by political philosophers and now, today,

229
00:24:25.820 --> 00:24:30.140
a public choice economist for hundreds of years,

230
00:24:30.140 --> 00:24:32.220
that when you have a situation under democracy

231
00:24:32.220 --> 00:25:02.220
Special Interest Groups for Bigger and Bigger Governments

232
00:25:02.220 --> 00:25:08.220
and nationwide political coalitions, for example, to oppose the sugar price support program.

233
00:25:08.220 --> 00:25:10.220
It's just not going to happen.

234
00:25:10.220 --> 00:25:13.220
And so this is true of the Constitution in general.

235
00:25:13.220 --> 00:25:20.220
There's a built-in, what we call a public choice problem here, in that it can't be self-enforcing.

236
00:25:20.220 --> 00:25:27.220
And the founding fathers were not so stupid as to think a mere piece of paper would be self-enforcing.

237
00:25:27.220 --> 00:25:29.220
How did they think it would be enforced?

238
00:25:29.220 --> 00:25:37.820
Well, the idea was that most of the governmental functions would be in the hands of the citizens

239
00:25:37.820 --> 00:25:39.960
and the states respectively.

240
00:25:39.960 --> 00:25:44.780
The citizens of the states were to be the ones who were to enforce this constitution

241
00:25:44.780 --> 00:25:48.980
because after all, the citizens of the states were sovereign.

242
00:25:48.980 --> 00:25:54.240
The central government was created as their agent to be their servant.

243
00:25:54.240 --> 00:25:58.940
That government was supposed to be the servant, not the master of the people like it is today.

244
00:25:58.940 --> 00:26:05.940
And so that's how the Constitution was supposed to be enforced, by the citizens of the respective sovereign states.

245
00:26:05.940 --> 00:26:14.940
A political scientist at Johns Hopkins named Gottfried Dietze wrote a great little book called America's Political Dilemma.

246
00:26:14.940 --> 00:26:18.940
And that's spelled D-I-E-T-Z-E, Gottfried Dietze.

247
00:26:18.940 --> 00:26:22.940
In America's Political Dilemma, he explains this, he says,

248
00:26:22.940 --> 00:26:35.940
Federalism instituted to enable the federal government to check oppressions by the governments of the states, and vice versa, and vice versa, appears to be a supreme principle of the Constitution.

249
00:26:35.940 --> 00:26:41.940
So that's his very brief statement of what I've been talking about recently, divided sovereignty.

250
00:26:41.940 --> 00:26:51.940
He goes on to say this, he says, before the Civil War, the nature of American federalism was still a subject of debate.

251
00:26:51.940 --> 00:27:04.940
The outcome of the Civil War ended that debate. The nationalists emerged as victors. National power increased as the 20th century approached, along with the disappearance of states' rights.

252
00:27:04.940 --> 00:27:19.940
That period was subsequently characterized by an increasing interference with economic freedom and constitutes a constitutional revolution that can well be termed a reversal of the revolution of 1787.

253
00:27:19.940 --> 00:27:26.940
So what Mises is saying is that the revolution of 1787, the American Revolution, was a states' rights revolution.

254
00:27:26.940 --> 00:27:32.940
The system of government set up was a compact of the states where the citizens of the states were sovereign.

255
00:27:32.940 --> 00:27:39.940
The Civil War, so-called, was a revolution against that revolution because it did destroy that system.

256
00:27:39.940 --> 00:27:46.940
That's why in my writings, I argue every chance I get, that Lincoln's War destroyed the Union.

257
00:27:46.940 --> 00:27:51.400
Union, it didn't save the Union, it destroyed the voluntary Union of the Founding Fathers

258
00:27:51.400 --> 00:27:56.260
and it destroyed federalism and states' rights at the same time.

259
00:27:56.260 --> 00:28:04.220
It saved the Union geographically, but philosophically it destroyed the Union.

260
00:28:04.220 --> 00:28:11.300
And you have big government advocates and imperialists who weaseled their way into the

261
00:28:11.300 --> 00:28:16.020
government, top levels of government, after the turn of the century, who have actually

262
00:28:16.020 --> 00:28:22.020
We praise this outcome publicly. Woodrow Wilson is one example. Before Wilson was president,

263
00:28:22.020 --> 00:28:27.220
he was a political science professor at Princeton, and he wrote a book called Congressional Government.

264
00:28:27.220 --> 00:28:31.820
He wrote another book called Constitutional Government in the United States. And here's

265
00:28:31.820 --> 00:28:37.380
what Woodrow Wilson said about this. He said, and he's writing this in an approving tone

266
00:28:37.380 --> 00:28:42.640
of voice. He said, the war between the states established this principle that the federal

267
00:28:42.640 --> 00:28:48.140
The central government is, through its courts, the final judge of its own powers."

268
00:28:48.140 --> 00:28:52.840
So it was no longer the citizens of the states who would be the judges of the appropriate

269
00:28:52.840 --> 00:28:54.840
powers of the central government.

270
00:28:54.840 --> 00:29:00.600
It was the central government itself, through its courts, that would decide the limits of

271
00:29:00.600 --> 00:29:02.800
its own powers.

272
00:29:02.800 --> 00:29:08.840
And as I alluded to earlier, most of the founders thought that this would be a disaster, an

273
00:29:08.840 --> 00:29:12.000
absolute disaster.

274
00:29:12.000 --> 00:29:17.720
This is a classic case of the thoughts regarding the Hanals.

275
00:29:17.720 --> 00:29:25.400
After Jefferson died, probably the most prominent proponent of this view was John C. Calhoun,

276
00:29:25.400 --> 00:29:30.480
and the book that I mentioned to you yesterday, a good one to pick up is called Union and

277
00:29:30.480 --> 00:29:31.480
Liberty.

278
00:29:31.480 --> 00:29:37.940
The editor is Ross Lentz, L-E-N-C-E, and it contains his book, actually, The Disquisition

279
00:29:37.940 --> 00:29:40.660
on Government.

280
00:29:40.660 --> 00:29:45.140
So if you want to read a good rendition of this Jeffersonian states' rights philosophy,

281
00:29:45.140 --> 00:29:47.580
that's where to read it from.

282
00:29:47.580 --> 00:29:52.100
And I'd like to share with you just one thing he says, one of his main arguments.

283
00:29:52.100 --> 00:29:58.980
Murray Rothbard always said that he thought Calhoun was one of America's most brilliant

284
00:29:58.980 --> 00:30:01.060
political philosophers.

285
00:30:01.060 --> 00:30:08.060
And he is hopelessly trashed and denigrated by the Lincoln cult, especially Jaffa and

286
00:30:08.060 --> 00:30:09.660
the Claremont people and the Straussians.

287
00:30:09.660 --> 00:30:11.540
They just despise Calhoun.

288
00:30:11.540 --> 00:30:14.060
They make up lies about him all the time in their writings.

289
00:30:14.060 --> 00:30:17.060
I don't know where they get some of this stuff.

290
00:30:17.060 --> 00:30:19.540
But he has no redeeming value at all in their eyes.

291
00:30:19.540 --> 00:30:27.260
And here's one of the things that Calhoun said about the nature of democracy.

292
00:30:27.260 --> 00:30:30.820
He's talking about, he broke, he said under democracy you're going to have two groups

293
00:30:30.820 --> 00:30:38.820
In society, you can have one group that are the net taxpayers, people who pay a lot more or pay more than they get back from government,

294
00:30:38.820 --> 00:30:44.820
and the other group is net tax consumers, who get more from government benefits than they pay in tax.

295
00:30:44.820 --> 00:30:56.820
And he predicted that it is inevitable, it's like one of the iron laws of politics, that the group of net tax consumers will dominate taxpayers,

296
00:30:56.820 --> 00:31:12.820
The People Who Defend the Constitution and Limit It Government

297
00:31:26.820 --> 00:31:33.460
in the Contest be regarded as mere abstractionists and indeed deservedly if they should indulge

298
00:31:33.460 --> 00:31:38.640
in the folly of supposing that the party of possession of the ballot box and the physical

299
00:31:38.640 --> 00:31:44.440
force of the country could be successfully resisted by an appeal to reason, truth, justice

300
00:31:44.440 --> 00:31:47.940
or the obligations imposed by the Constitution.

301
00:31:47.940 --> 00:31:53.860
The end of the contest would be the subversion of the Constitution and that has sure come

302
00:31:53.860 --> 00:31:55.500
true as has it.

303
00:31:55.500 --> 00:32:06.900
This was around 1850. Calhoun died in 1850. If you want a good, the legal view of the

304
00:32:06.900 --> 00:32:11.740
Jeffersonian Constitution, it's a book called View of the Constitution of the United States

305
00:32:11.740 --> 00:32:16.500
by St. George Tucker. And it's been recently reprinted so you can buy it pretty cheaply

306
00:32:16.500 --> 00:32:23.420
in paperback online at Amazon or in other places. And this was the Jeffersonian view

307
00:32:23.420 --> 00:32:29.260
of the Constitution, very popular. Who was St. George Tucker? He was a professor of law

308
00:32:29.260 --> 00:32:35.820
at William and Mary College. He took the place of Thomas Jefferson's teacher, George Wythe,

309
00:32:36.380 --> 00:32:42.220
who we have a student here who goes to Wythe College. He pronounces it Wythe, but it's spelled

310
00:32:42.220 --> 00:32:47.500
Wythe. There's an E on the end, W-Y-T-H-E, so I'm going to stick with Wythe. I want everybody

311
00:32:47.500 --> 00:32:53.260
at your college who calls it Wythe. He was a signer of the Declaration of Independence,

312
00:32:53.260 --> 00:33:08.940
St. George Tucker fought in the American Revolution, wounded in battle, became a successful lawyer.

313
00:33:08.940 --> 00:33:17.180
He adopted John Randolph of Roanoke, his mother was widowed and he adopted John Randolph.

314
00:33:17.180 --> 00:33:24.140
He authored a plan for the abolition of slavery in Virginia in 1796, which was one of the

315
00:33:24.140 --> 00:33:29.740
first plans offered anywhere in America for the abolition of slavery.

316
00:33:29.740 --> 00:33:36.540
And in his book, St. George Tucker said this, he said, the union of the sovereignty of a

317
00:33:36.540 --> 00:33:43.500
state with the central government constitutes a state of usurpation and absolute tyranny

318
00:33:43.500 --> 00:33:44.960
over the people.

319
00:33:44.960 --> 00:33:50.560
He was saying, if you have a union of sovereignty with the central government, meaning if you

320
00:33:50.560 --> 00:33:55.600
allow the central government to decide for itself what the limits of its power are to

321
00:33:55.600 --> 00:34:00.020
be, well then you're going to have tyranny, that's what's going to happen.

322
00:34:00.020 --> 00:34:06.160
You have to have the citizens in control with some mechanism, some practical mechanism and

323
00:34:06.160 --> 00:34:10.040
the one they were talking about was states' rights.

324
00:34:10.040 --> 00:34:17.040
And he went on to say, if the unlimited authority of the central state were to change the constitution

325
00:34:17.040 --> 00:34:22.520
itself, the government, whatever be its form, is absolute and despotic.

326
00:34:22.520 --> 00:34:28.580
And he believed also that, I'm still quoting, the doctrine of non-resistance against arbitrary

327
00:34:28.580 --> 00:34:36.240
power and oppression is absurd, slavish, and destructive to the good and happiness of mankind.

328
00:34:36.240 --> 00:35:06.240
and so and that's all I'm going to read from that I don't want to read the whole book to you here it's a sure recipe for putting everyone to sleep but but I recommend it to you it's the Jeffersonian states rights version of the Constitution but of course this is another one of those things that has been forgotten since 1865 for the most part and most Americans have been taught the New England version of American history they haven't been taught the real version they've been taught that the winner is always

329
00:35:06.240 --> 00:35:12.560
The History After Wars. A contemporary of Tucker's was a United States Senator from Virginia named John Taylor

330
00:35:13.360 --> 00:35:19.840
who wrote a book called Tyranny Unmasked that I mentioned yesterday and a few things he said

331
00:35:19.840 --> 00:35:26.240
about this topic in there. He said, being an essential principle for preserving liberty,

332
00:35:27.120 --> 00:35:33.600
the Constitution never could have designed to destroy it, to destroy liberty, by investing five

333
00:35:33.600 --> 00:35:39.280
Five or six men installed for life with the power of regulating the constitutional rights

334
00:35:39.280 --> 00:35:42.480
of all political departments."

335
00:35:42.480 --> 00:35:48.380
So what he was saying is he thought it would have been an absurdity for the founders to

336
00:35:48.380 --> 00:35:54.160
think that, like I said yesterday, five or six government lawyers with lifetime tenure

337
00:35:54.160 --> 00:35:58.760
putting the power to defend everyone's liberty in their hands and their hands alone, a Supreme

338
00:35:58.760 --> 00:35:59.760
Court.

339
00:35:59.760 --> 00:36:01.480
That was craziness.

340
00:36:01.480 --> 00:36:07.640
So that was the states' rights thing, and that's what states' rights was always about.

341
00:36:07.640 --> 00:36:12.600
It was a mechanism for the citizens themselves to control their central government.

342
00:36:12.600 --> 00:36:21.440
Now a hardcore anarcho-capitalist could argue, well, this whole history now, this whole period

343
00:36:21.440 --> 00:36:25.080
shows that a limited government is impossible.

344
00:36:25.080 --> 00:36:29.200
You could use the whole American experience to say, well, this was the best attempt to

345
00:36:29.200 --> 00:36:35.680
have limited government and despite the best of intentions that it sure didn't work, it kind of

346
00:36:35.680 --> 00:36:42.000
worked until 1865 but then it was destroyed at gunpoint. In my view, as soon as the central

347
00:36:42.000 --> 00:36:49.520
government became powerful enough to destroy, rule by the citizens themselves, it did so, it did so

348
00:36:49.520 --> 00:36:56.960
by force of arms. There used to be a lot of conservative and libertarian writers and thinkers

349
00:36:56.960 --> 00:37:01.960
who wrote quite a lot about this because they understood this truth.

350
00:37:01.960 --> 00:37:10.960
Not so many anymore. A lot of libertarians, like our friends at the Cato Institute, I think are afraid of being branded as politically incorrect

351
00:37:10.960 --> 00:37:18.960
because they never mentioned this at all. They're more concerned with being acceptable to the Washington establishment and to academe

352
00:37:18.960 --> 00:37:24.960
than to speaking the truth about history, about this. But that wasn't always true.

353
00:37:24.960 --> 00:37:33.960
Back in the older days, Frank Chataroff, one of the famous old right icons, wrote this great little book, The Income Tax Route of All Evil.

354
00:37:33.960 --> 00:37:38.960
He addressed this whole issue of how to suppress tyranny.

355
00:37:38.960 --> 00:37:49.960
And he said this, the real obstacle to tyranny is the psychological resistance to centralization that the state's rights tradition fosters.

356
00:37:49.960 --> 00:37:54.800
The citizen of divided allegiance cannot be reduced to subservience.

357
00:37:54.800 --> 00:38:00.040
If he is in a habit of serving two political gods, he cannot be dominated by either one.

358
00:38:00.040 --> 00:38:02.520
And he spells gods with a small g.

359
00:38:02.520 --> 00:38:09.080
No political authority ever achieved absolutism until the people were deprived of a choice of loyalties.

360
00:38:09.080 --> 00:38:17.240
And he goes on to say that it was not by accident that Stalin, Mussolini and Lenin liquidated any and all competing authorities before consolidating their power,

361
00:38:17.240 --> 00:38:20.920
including the church and everything else, not just state governments.

362
00:38:23.000 --> 00:38:28.360
He mentioned Charterov writes about divided authority. He calls Madison's divided sovereignty

363
00:38:28.360 --> 00:38:35.160
divided authority. He says, this was nothing less than the bulwark of freedom, for freedom means

364
00:38:35.160 --> 00:38:40.360
the absence of restraints, and government cannot give freedom, it can only take it away. The more

365
00:38:40.360 --> 00:38:44.920
power the government exercises, the less freedom the people will enjoy, and when the government

366
00:38:44.920 --> 00:38:47.920
The government has a monopoly of power, the people have no freedom.

367
00:38:47.920 --> 00:38:54.920
That is the definition, the very definition of absolutism, monopoly of power.

368
00:38:54.920 --> 00:38:59.920
And so, Choterov wrote kindly about states' rights.

369
00:38:59.920 --> 00:39:02.920
The second person I'll mention is Ludwig von Mises.

370
00:39:02.920 --> 00:39:08.920
In his book, Omnipotent Government, which is for sale right outside his door, I'm sure,

371
00:39:08.920 --> 00:39:14.920
He was talking in one passage about developments in America and Switzerland,

372
00:39:14.920 --> 00:39:17.920
in this one particular passage I'm going to quote,

373
00:39:17.920 --> 00:39:23.920
and about how the growth of government had been occurring in these two countries.

374
00:39:23.920 --> 00:39:28.920
And he says, new powers accrued not to the member states, but to the federal government.

375
00:39:28.920 --> 00:39:30.920
And federal here meaning central government.

376
00:39:30.920 --> 00:39:35.920
Every step toward more government interference and toward more planning means at the same time

377
00:39:35.920 --> 00:39:39.920
and expansion of the jurisdiction of the central government.

378
00:39:39.920 --> 00:39:45.920
Washington and Bern, Bern the capital, Switzerland, were once the seats of federal governments.

379
00:39:45.920 --> 00:39:53.920
Today they are capitals in the true sense of the word and the states and cantons are virtually reduced to the status of provinces.

380
00:39:53.920 --> 00:39:58.920
And here's a part that I italicize where von Mises said,

381
00:39:58.920 --> 00:40:05.520
It is a very significant fact that the adversaries of the trend toward more government control

382
00:40:05.520 --> 00:40:11.280
describe their opposition as a fight against Washington and a fight against Bern, i.e.

383
00:40:11.280 --> 00:40:13.320
against centralization.

384
00:40:13.320 --> 00:40:19.340
It is conceived as a contest of states' rights versus the central power."

385
00:40:19.340 --> 00:40:28.060
So to Ludwig von Mises, the whole contest over liberty and freedom was based on opposition

386
00:40:28.060 --> 00:40:32.460
to the central government, to the national, what's going on in the national capital, and

387
00:40:32.460 --> 00:40:35.060
versus states' rights.

388
00:40:35.060 --> 00:40:39.340
And keep in mind, it didn't mean that there's something called a state that has rights.

389
00:40:39.340 --> 00:40:44.940
I've had some Randians in particular annoy the hell out of me with it.

390
00:40:44.940 --> 00:40:50.980
Only people have rights, states don't have, you know, my response is usually a duh to

391
00:40:50.980 --> 00:40:51.980
that.

392
00:40:51.980 --> 00:40:57.100
The meaning of states' rights was individuals have a right to collectively band together

393
00:40:57.100 --> 00:40:59.940
to Oppose Tyranny at the Central Level of Government.

394
00:40:59.940 --> 00:41:00.940
That's what states write.

395
00:41:00.940 --> 00:41:04.580
It doesn't mean there's something called a state of Alabama that has rights.

396
00:41:04.580 --> 00:41:06.500
It doesn't mean that.

397
00:41:06.500 --> 00:41:07.620
Never did mean that.

398
00:41:07.620 --> 00:41:09.340
Jefferson never thought that's what it meant.

399
00:41:09.340 --> 00:41:12.060
Madison never thought, nobody ever thought that.

400
00:41:12.060 --> 00:41:18.160
Only the Randians seem to think that because they keep emailing me in these indignant tones

401
00:41:18.160 --> 00:41:25.540
of their letters as though they've discovered some brilliant point out there.

402
00:41:25.540 --> 00:41:26.940
Writing them back has no effect.

403
00:41:26.940 --> 00:41:46.220
I keep saying the same thing over and over again, but Murray Rothbard, a young Murray Rothbard in his early 20s, wrote a letter to Strom Thurmond, the late Strom Thurmond, who ran for president in 1948 on the state's rights party ticket.

404
00:41:46.220 --> 00:41:59.220
And he wrote this letter, Murray said, although a New Yorker born and bred, I was a staunch supporter of the Strom-Thurman movement in 1948.

405
00:41:59.220 --> 00:42:07.220
He said, but the problem with the movement was that it focused too excessively on the civil tyranny program.

406
00:42:07.220 --> 00:42:15.220
Murray called the civil rights legislation the civil tyranny legislation because it violated property rights.

407
00:42:15.220 --> 00:42:28.220
And Murray, like a lot of other people, thought that the purpose of this was not justice for minorities, but federal control and federal expansion of the bureaucracy.

408
00:42:28.220 --> 00:42:36.220
And so Murray went on to say that this program of federal civil rights should be opposed as an affront to property rights and the freedom of association.

409
00:42:36.220 --> 00:42:44.220
And what was really needed was a national as opposed to a regional party to fight, quote, the power hungry Washington bureaucracy.

410
00:42:44.220 --> 00:42:52.780
So that was his view. And of course there have always been the proponents of centralized power.

411
00:42:52.780 --> 00:42:57.260
We wouldn't have all the centralized power that we have today without some very influential

412
00:42:57.260 --> 00:43:06.060
proponents. And so I want to read a typical argument from a political writer who wrote

413
00:43:06.940 --> 00:43:11.900
during the same time that von Mises was writing Omnipotent Government, around the same time.

414
00:43:11.900 --> 00:43:18.540
This was a contemporary of von Mises in Europe at the time, who was making the opposite case.

415
00:43:18.540 --> 00:43:22.940
He was making a case for a consolidated government. And I'll read you a few things.

416
00:43:24.300 --> 00:43:32.060
He started out by condemning the impotence and fragmentation of the, he was referring to Germany

417
00:43:32.060 --> 00:43:39.580
here, of provinces. And he referred to the, quote, struggle between federalism and centralization.

418
00:43:39.580 --> 00:43:53.980
So this proponent of centralized governmental power understood, like Mises did, that the biggest opposition to monopoly government power was federalism and states' rights, although he was on the other side.

419
00:43:53.980 --> 00:44:09.980
This writer naturally turned to Abraham Lincoln's first inaugural address to make his case for the elimination of state rights in Germany.

420
00:44:09.980 --> 00:44:11.980
He said this,

421
00:44:11.980 --> 00:44:16.940
The individual states of the American Union could not have possessed any state sovereignty

422
00:44:16.940 --> 00:44:20.300
of their own, for it was not these states that formed the Union.

423
00:44:20.300 --> 00:44:25.020
On the contrary, it was the Union which formed a great part of the so-called states."

424
00:44:25.020 --> 00:44:29.600
That was one of Lincoln's theories that the states did not form the Union, the Union formed

425
00:44:29.600 --> 00:44:30.740
the states.

426
00:44:30.740 --> 00:44:35.300
So the Union was older than the states, he argued, therefore the states were never sovereign.

427
00:44:35.300 --> 00:44:40.460
And if you just think about that logically, it's the same as saying a marriage can be

428
00:44:40.460 --> 00:44:46.580
A marriage cannot be older than either spouse, because a marriage is a union, and how could

429
00:44:46.580 --> 00:44:49.340
a marital union be older than either spouse?

430
00:44:49.340 --> 00:44:51.400
It's a logical impossibility.

431
00:44:51.400 --> 00:44:55.200
The union of two things cannot be older than either of the two things.

432
00:44:55.200 --> 00:45:00.420
That was Lincoln's theory, and I might as well put it on the screen here from the horse's

433
00:45:00.420 --> 00:45:01.420
mouth.

434
00:45:01.420 --> 00:45:26.600
This is from, it might be a little too small for you to read, but this is from Lincoln's

435
00:45:26.600 --> 00:45:31.320
first inaugural address where he made the argument that the Union is older than the

436
00:45:31.320 --> 00:45:34.600
Therefore, no such thing as state sovereignty ever existed.

437
00:45:34.600 --> 00:45:37.080
He said, the Union is much older than the Constitution.

438
00:45:37.080 --> 00:45:39.960
It was formed by the Articles of Association.

439
00:45:39.960 --> 00:45:43.120
It was matured and continued by the Declaration of Independence.

440
00:45:43.120 --> 00:45:46.320
It was further matured by the Articles of Confederation.

441
00:45:46.320 --> 00:45:49.680
And finally, in 1787, one of the declared objects

442
00:45:49.680 --> 00:45:52.600
for the Constitution was to form a more perfect Union.

443
00:45:52.600 --> 00:45:57.280
And so this German political writer was paraphrasing that.

444
00:45:57.280 --> 00:45:58.800
That's exactly what he was paraphrasing.

445
00:45:58.800 --> 00:46:03.400
and making his case for abolishing states' rights in Germany.

446
00:46:03.400 --> 00:46:11.040
A few other things that this writer said was that it would be desirable for Germany to

447
00:46:11.040 --> 00:46:16.580
quote, eliminate states' rights altogether, since for us the state as such is only a form

448
00:46:16.580 --> 00:46:22.320
but the essential is its content, the nation, the people, the whole people, or is that whole

449
00:46:22.320 --> 00:46:23.320
people argument.

450
00:46:23.320 --> 00:46:28.600
It is clear that everything else must be subordinated to its sovereign interests,

451
00:46:28.600 --> 00:46:33.960
its meaning the national government. In particular, we cannot grant to any individual state within

452
00:46:33.960 --> 00:46:39.000
a nation and the state representing it state sovereignty and sovereignty and point of political

453
00:46:39.000 --> 00:46:44.680
power. Then he goes on to say the mischief of individual federated states must cease

454
00:46:44.680 --> 00:46:52.120
and will someday cease. Okay, let's see, I don't know though. I guess that's about all I'll read

455
00:46:52.120 --> 00:47:03.440
from that. Okay well any idea who I might be talking about? I've been quoting from

456
00:47:03.440 --> 00:47:07.560
Mein Kampf. This was all Adolf Hitler saying these things, even the quoting

457
00:47:07.560 --> 00:47:12.080
quoting Lincoln's first inaugural address. There was a section in Mein Kampf

458
00:47:12.080 --> 00:47:16.440
about the state sovereignty that I've been reading from. If anybody wants the

459
00:47:16.440 --> 00:47:21.400
footnotes I'd be glad to give them to you at some point. You know I got onto

460
00:47:21.400 --> 00:47:26.520
of this, because during my debate with Harry Jaffa, I knew he would do this, but because

461
00:47:26.520 --> 00:47:32.320
I, he did this when he debated Mel Bradford and other people by insinuating with sort

462
00:47:32.320 --> 00:47:37.640
of some weasel word language that you're a Nazi. If you oppose my view of Lincoln, you're

463
00:47:37.640 --> 00:47:44.120
a Nazi. And so, but the sort of the weasely way he does it is, the way he did it, it's

464
00:47:44.120 --> 00:47:49.920
in his latest book, and he pulled this on me during our debate, there was a former Nazi

465
00:47:49.920 --> 00:47:58.200
A Nazi named Rauschning, who supposedly said that Hitler once said that it was a shame

466
00:47:58.200 --> 00:48:04.000
that the South lost the American Civil War because they had the right idea about race

467
00:48:04.000 --> 00:48:05.240
relations.

468
00:48:05.240 --> 00:48:11.080
So here's a former Nazi who's not the most reliable person, supposedly quoting Adolf

469
00:48:11.080 --> 00:48:17.520
Hitler himself, and this is in the front of chapter three of Japan's latest book, this

470
00:48:17.520 --> 00:48:18.520
sort of thing.

471
00:48:18.520 --> 00:48:24.520
And then he'll say, well, therefore, Di Lorenzo must agree with Adolf Hitler.

472
00:48:24.520 --> 00:48:29.440
How's that for a brilliant act of logic?

473
00:48:29.440 --> 00:48:31.520
So he pulled this BS on me.

474
00:48:31.520 --> 00:48:36.760
I knew he would, because he does this with everybody, he calls you Nazi or something

475
00:48:36.760 --> 00:48:37.760
like that.

476
00:48:37.760 --> 00:48:42.720
And so, but it just so happened that I remembered that as an undergraduate I had read Mein Kampf

477
00:48:42.720 --> 00:48:47.080
in a history class, a European history class, and I remember there was a section there on

478
00:48:47.080 --> 00:48:48.600
and State Sovereignty.

479
00:48:48.600 --> 00:48:52.200
So the next day, I wrote this article on lewrockwell.com

480
00:48:52.200 --> 00:48:56.720
entitled Harry Jaffa's Hitlerian Defense of Lincoln.

481
00:48:56.720 --> 00:48:58.000
And I put all this in there.

482
00:48:58.000 --> 00:49:00.240
I proved that it was really Adolf Hitler

483
00:49:00.240 --> 00:49:01.920
who agreed with Lincoln and Jaffa

484
00:49:01.920 --> 00:49:03.280
on the whole issue of states' rights.

485
00:49:03.280 --> 00:49:05.800
They're the ones, they're the nationalists

486
00:49:05.800 --> 00:49:08.040
and the centralizers, not me.

487
00:49:08.040 --> 00:49:09.920
I'm opposed to all this stuff.

488
00:49:09.920 --> 00:49:14.100
And so if anybody is a Hitlerite, it's these guys.

489
00:49:14.100 --> 00:49:20.340
So that's the sort of sleazy, dishonest type of argumentation you get from these certain

490
00:49:20.340 --> 00:49:23.380
characters like this.

491
00:49:23.380 --> 00:49:32.060
Anyway, so the point of all this, the second part of my talk here, is that through the

492
00:49:32.060 --> 00:49:38.620
intellectual history of this, is that there have been a lot of libertarians over the years

493
00:49:38.620 --> 00:49:42.540
who have understood this, that divided sovereignty is necessary.

494
00:49:42.540 --> 00:49:44.500
If you're gonna have government,

495
00:49:44.500 --> 00:49:46.080
you need to have divided sovereignty.

496
00:49:46.080 --> 00:49:48.020
There's only any hope of preserving

497
00:49:48.020 --> 00:49:49.900
some semblance of freedom.

498
00:49:49.900 --> 00:49:52.380
And so if not, you're gonna have centralized tyranny

499
00:49:52.380 --> 00:49:56.300
like we have today, and we're all essentially slaves

500
00:49:56.300 --> 00:50:00.020
to the IRS for the most part today,

501
00:50:00.020 --> 00:50:01.500
and that's what we've got.

502
00:50:01.500 --> 00:50:03.300
And so maybe I'll stop there.

503
00:50:03.300 --> 00:50:04.300
That's about all I wanted to say

504
00:50:04.300 --> 00:50:05.620
about what states' rights is

505
00:50:05.620 --> 00:50:08.900
and the classical liberal states' rights tradition.

506
00:50:08.900 --> 00:50:11.980
And oh yeah, I guess since I have trouble

507
00:50:11.980 --> 00:50:41.980
I will mention, since I mentioned that Karl Marx congratulated Abraham Lincoln for his re-election, I have to also mention that the great historian of liberty, Lord Acton, corresponded with Robert E. Lee all during the war, and after the war, and after the war he wrote Robert E. Lee saying that he considered the struggle for states' rights and the war of secession to be the struggle for everyone's liberty, not just Southern

508
00:50:41.980 --> 00:50:43.740
of the Southern Confederacy.

509
00:50:43.740 --> 00:50:53.460
Lord Acton was a prominent member of the intelligentsia of England at the time, an advisor to the

510
00:50:53.460 --> 00:50:56.460
chancellor and so forth.

511
00:50:56.460 --> 00:51:00.620
And he said that he saw in states' rights the redemption of all of our liberty, not

512
00:51:00.620 --> 00:51:02.700
just the Southern Confederacy.

513
00:51:02.700 --> 00:51:09.500
And he went on to say that he was as depressed and disappointed over Appomattox as he was

514
00:51:09.500 --> 00:51:14.660
elated over the outcome of the Battle of Waterloo, where Napoleon was defeated.

515
00:51:14.660 --> 00:51:21.140
And so that's a pretty strong language from the acknowledged greatest historian of liberty

516
00:51:21.140 --> 00:51:22.140
of his time.

517
00:51:22.140 --> 00:51:27.300
And on the other hand, you had old Karl Marx congratulating Abe Lincoln on his books.

518
00:51:27.300 --> 00:51:31.340
I'd like to point out that difference, but that's all I'm going to say for now, and I'll

519
00:51:31.340 --> 00:51:38.740
welcome questions or comments about any of this, if anybody has any.

520
00:51:38.740 --> 00:51:49.300
Commentaries are okay as long as they're short. It's the afternoon. Nobody has

521
00:51:49.300 --> 00:51:56.460
anything? Well, I'm just, you know, I get paid by the hour here, so I'll just...

522
00:52:08.740 --> 00:52:11.740
and the Constitution.

523
00:52:11.740 --> 00:52:18.740
And who out there is working to advocate for whatever remains of the state's right there?

524
00:52:18.740 --> 00:52:21.740
Or I know in our state, in our Constitution,

525
00:52:21.740 --> 00:52:24.740
the very steel business is very free and intense.

526
00:52:24.740 --> 00:52:27.740
So it's all of us in the Constitution.

527
00:52:27.740 --> 00:52:31.740
I believe that every officer in the State of Missouri,

528
00:52:31.740 --> 00:52:33.740
and there's probably a black flag in other states,

529
00:52:33.740 --> 00:52:53.700
Now I'm not a political strategist, I'm an academic.

530
00:52:53.700 --> 00:53:01.100
I look at it as what people like myself and other people who write for the Mises Institute

531
00:53:01.100 --> 00:53:31.100
We're sort of like the ammunition factory, and then the warriors who are out there can use the ammunition that we provide, if it's useful, to become activists and make the arguments, because there are points in history when something happens, when there's an opportunity for some sort of dramatic change in the government, but you have to be equipped with the ideas to make your case to move in the direction of liberty.

532
00:53:31.100 --> 00:53:36.020
or else during that same period the bad guys can win because they've got their arguments

533
00:53:36.020 --> 00:53:37.020
too.

534
00:53:37.020 --> 00:53:46.180
In recent American history, when Reagan was elected in 1980, I'm not worshipful as Reagan

535
00:53:46.180 --> 00:53:51.740
as a lot of people, a lot of conservatives are, but he was a politician, I don't put

536
00:53:51.740 --> 00:53:57.260
great faith in any politician, but what had happened was the government was screwing things

537
00:53:57.260 --> 00:54:03.500
comes up so badly it did provide a big opportunity to make some real progress to downsize government.

538
00:54:03.500 --> 00:54:10.620
We had 13% inflation and 10% unemployment and 20% mortgage rates and the regulatory

539
00:54:10.620 --> 00:54:15.580
agencies like the Federal Trade Commission was so out of control that even the Democratic

540
00:54:15.580 --> 00:54:21.500
controlled Congress defunded it as a protest because it was just so out of control at the

541
00:54:21.500 --> 00:54:22.500
time.

542
00:54:22.500 --> 00:54:25.780
And so there was sort of a collapse of the bureaucracy.

543
00:54:25.780 --> 00:54:32.300
The bureaucracy had just screwed up so badly that Ronald Reagan was elected in a landslide

544
00:54:32.300 --> 00:54:34.820
and they did do some good things.

545
00:54:34.820 --> 00:54:39.140
With Jimmy Carter's help, they deregulated the airlines.

546
00:54:39.140 --> 00:54:40.660
That was Carter's deal.

547
00:54:40.660 --> 00:54:42.100
They deregulated trucking.

548
00:54:42.100 --> 00:54:43.100
That was his deal.

549
00:54:43.100 --> 00:54:46.980
Carter got the ball rolling on the deregulation of oil prices.

550
00:54:46.980 --> 00:54:51.580
Reagan only finished up on all of this, but this stuff all happened during Carter's deal

551
00:54:51.580 --> 00:54:56.980
Because even though he was a Democrat at the time, the government was so bad that even

552
00:54:56.980 --> 00:55:01.580
a Democrat like Carter thought he could make political hay for himself by getting rid of

553
00:55:01.580 --> 00:55:04.580
some of these regulatory agencies.

554
00:55:04.580 --> 00:55:11.300
But luckily, there was a whole body of ideas about why regulation is a bad idea.

555
00:55:11.300 --> 00:55:15.340
The Chicago School and the Austrian School had been working on these for decades and

556
00:55:15.340 --> 00:55:16.340
decades.

557
00:55:16.340 --> 00:55:20.860
So when the opportunity came, the activists in Washington had these ideas.

558
00:55:20.860 --> 00:55:25.180
That's why the Heritage Foundation was founded, for example, to use these ideas.

559
00:55:25.180 --> 00:55:32.940
They've sort of turned into a tacky, kitschy policy report mill since then.

560
00:55:32.940 --> 00:55:37.060
In the early days, Heritage used to publish things by Milton Friedman and people like

561
00:55:37.060 --> 00:55:42.140
that, but now it's all short reports by congressional staffers for the most part.

562
00:55:42.140 --> 00:55:45.340
They don't really rely on the serious scholars that much anymore.

563
00:55:45.340 --> 00:55:46.340
Cato is different.

564
00:55:46.340 --> 00:55:50.900
those more scholarly work with the Cato Journal and some of their

565
00:55:50.900 --> 00:55:56.540
conferences, but that's the way I see this whole battle is a

566
00:55:56.540 --> 00:56:02.900
division of labor here. You know, I tell my students when I try to explain the law

567
00:56:02.900 --> 00:56:07.280
of comparative advantage, I tell them I'm a horrible economist, but I'm even worse

568
00:56:07.280 --> 00:56:11.540
than everything else, so that's what I do. That's what I do, and we have to

569
00:56:11.540 --> 00:56:13.620
to Divide the Labor Somehow.

570
00:56:13.620 --> 00:56:24.380
And so I don't have any secret advice on how to be an activist.

571
00:56:24.380 --> 00:56:26.800
If there are no other questions or brilliant commentaries,

572
00:56:26.800 --> 00:56:28.340
I guess we'll take a break.

573
00:56:28.340 --> 00:56:32.540
And at 4 o'clock, Judge John Denson will be here.

574
00:56:32.540 --> 00:56:37.060
He's a judge, so if you have any drugs on you, get rid of them.

575
00:56:37.060 --> 00:56:39.060
Thank you very much.