Sam Weaver
The Big Lie (Große Lüge): Part III
By Sam Weaver
On 13 April, President Obama gave a speech on the budget. As just about every other Obama speech, it was sparse on specifics and laden with "lofty" rhetoric. As the first major speech of the 2012 campaign, it was heavy on politics and rooted in class warfare.
The theme — the intended message — of that speech was perhaps revealed in just one sentence:
"The fact is, their (Republicans') vision is less about reducing the deficit than it is about changing the basic social compact in America."
What is the basic social compact in America? What is a social compact?
The idea of a social compact extends at least as far back in relatively modern history as 11 November 1620, when the Pilgrims landed at what is now Cape Cod, Massachusetts and signed the Mayflower Compact. Social compact (or contract) "theory" was not formally proposed to the world (at least not since Moses!) until Thomas Hobbes did so in 1651 via his tome, Leviathan.
Hobbes was onto something big; really big. Influential thinkers all over Europe took notice. They appreciated the concept, but they all saw obvious flaws in Hobbes' idea.
I cannot say that The Enlightenment would not have happened without Hobbes' Leviathan. I can say with all honesty and assurance that social contract "theory" influenced, if not perhaps even drove, the "Age of Reason."
Philosophers from John Locke to Jean Jacques Rousseau adopted Hobbes' idea, exposed its original real and perceived flaws, and built upon it. Sadly, Locke's philosophy contained a major flaw and Rousseau's philosophy was rotten to the core.
Locke's social contract hypothesis with one crucial revision was indispensable in forming the Anglo-American worldview philosophy. Rousseau's social contract (or "compact") hypothesis helped to shape the Franco-German worldview philosophy. [See Part II of this series.]
Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan was misguided — flawed — in several ways, but Hobbes' did get at least one thing right. Hobbes understood that the nature of man is fundamentally selfish (i.e., flawed; corrupt and evil). Locke, perhaps guided by a (selfish?) passion to expose the flaws in Hobbes' hypothesis, argued that the nature of man is fundamentally good. Rousseau (ironically?!) argued likewise.
The culmination of Anglo-American (Judeo-Christian) worldview philosophy is the American Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution is the United States of America's one and only national social contract, or "compact." It recognizes the selfish nature of man — enumerated powers, checks and balances, limited government, etc., etc., etc.
Politicians — including President Obama — speak endlessly about "our shared values," "common goals" and "universal principles." Statesmen, on the other hand, place any mention of values, goals and principles within the context of the ideas set forth in the Declaration and the Constitution and, God forbid(?), the Holy Bible — the one Book that clearly outlines those ideas, values, goals and principles. [NOTE: Some of the greatest statesmen today just happen to be women.]
Who made the United States of America a great nation? Who would dare to argue that she is not at least a powerful and influential nation — if not an exceptional nation? Besides Barack Obama, that is.
Did Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, et. al., "create" a great and mighty nation? In their day, most of the world considered the upstart USA a backwater; and all of those guys have been dead for at least 175 years.
Did Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, et. al. make the United States of America a great nation? They have all been dead for 65 years or more and the moral, civil and cultural decline of America has been steady if not precipitous since then.
In his 13 April speech, President Obama actually said that it was the social programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid that made America a great nation. If you know history, you might be politically correct and say that this is a bit of "unfortunate" demagoguery. If you love Truth and Liberty, you must be forced to call it like it is — an absurd lie!
It was not men that made America great. It was the idea — the philosophical (Judeo-Christian) worldview. It was not men who commenced America's decline. It was the idea — the philosophical (secular/atheistic) worldview.
The Progressive Era (circa 1890-1929) was a transformational time in American history. Progressives set out to fundamentally change American culture from one rooted in the Anglo-American (Judeo-Christian) worldview philosophy to one set upon the flimsy (totalitarian) base of Franco-German (secular/atheist) worldview ideology. [More on this as this series "progresses."]
Very near the end of the 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama said more than twice that he wanted to "fundamentally change (or transform)" the United States of America. To every moral, educated and informed American, his meaning is now very clear. He wanted to revive the transformation from Liberty (Anglo-American, Judeo-Christian worldview) to socialism/tyranny (Franco-German, secular/atheistic worldview) that "Progressives" had started more than 100 years before, but which had sputtered somewhat since at least the 1980's.
In this series, I hope to expose the Big Lie. I will argue that "Progressive" (i.e., modern liberal) ideas, values, goals and principles are diametrical to American ideas. I will attempt to show that Anglo-American (Judeo-Christian) ideology produces Liberty and Justice, and is the only worldview philosophy that is conducive to both Liberty and Justice. Franco-German (secular/atheistic) ideology generates chaos, confusion and, ultimately, dependency and tyranny.
If you are open-minded, you will almost certainly disagree with me — maybe just on a few details, or perhaps fundamentally; to the core. I invite you to challenge me whenever you think I am wrong. I am often wrong. I am human. I want to learn from your perspective and insight. My mind is open, too. I only ask that you consider my perspective as I consider yours.
Vital Links:
Alexander's Essay
Walter Williams
Robert Meyer (see also, here and here.)
© Sam Weaver
May 28, 2011
On 13 April, President Obama gave a speech on the budget. As just about every other Obama speech, it was sparse on specifics and laden with "lofty" rhetoric. As the first major speech of the 2012 campaign, it was heavy on politics and rooted in class warfare.
The theme — the intended message — of that speech was perhaps revealed in just one sentence:
"The fact is, their (Republicans') vision is less about reducing the deficit than it is about changing the basic social compact in America."
What is the basic social compact in America? What is a social compact?
The idea of a social compact extends at least as far back in relatively modern history as 11 November 1620, when the Pilgrims landed at what is now Cape Cod, Massachusetts and signed the Mayflower Compact. Social compact (or contract) "theory" was not formally proposed to the world (at least not since Moses!) until Thomas Hobbes did so in 1651 via his tome, Leviathan.
Hobbes was onto something big; really big. Influential thinkers all over Europe took notice. They appreciated the concept, but they all saw obvious flaws in Hobbes' idea.
I cannot say that The Enlightenment would not have happened without Hobbes' Leviathan. I can say with all honesty and assurance that social contract "theory" influenced, if not perhaps even drove, the "Age of Reason."
Philosophers from John Locke to Jean Jacques Rousseau adopted Hobbes' idea, exposed its original real and perceived flaws, and built upon it. Sadly, Locke's philosophy contained a major flaw and Rousseau's philosophy was rotten to the core.
Locke's social contract hypothesis with one crucial revision was indispensable in forming the Anglo-American worldview philosophy. Rousseau's social contract (or "compact") hypothesis helped to shape the Franco-German worldview philosophy. [See Part II of this series.]
Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan was misguided — flawed — in several ways, but Hobbes' did get at least one thing right. Hobbes understood that the nature of man is fundamentally selfish (i.e., flawed; corrupt and evil). Locke, perhaps guided by a (selfish?) passion to expose the flaws in Hobbes' hypothesis, argued that the nature of man is fundamentally good. Rousseau (ironically?!) argued likewise.
The culmination of Anglo-American (Judeo-Christian) worldview philosophy is the American Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution is the United States of America's one and only national social contract, or "compact." It recognizes the selfish nature of man — enumerated powers, checks and balances, limited government, etc., etc., etc.
Politicians — including President Obama — speak endlessly about "our shared values," "common goals" and "universal principles." Statesmen, on the other hand, place any mention of values, goals and principles within the context of the ideas set forth in the Declaration and the Constitution and, God forbid(?), the Holy Bible — the one Book that clearly outlines those ideas, values, goals and principles. [NOTE: Some of the greatest statesmen today just happen to be women.]
Who made the United States of America a great nation? Who would dare to argue that she is not at least a powerful and influential nation — if not an exceptional nation? Besides Barack Obama, that is.
Did Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, Benjamin Franklin, James Madison, et. al., "create" a great and mighty nation? In their day, most of the world considered the upstart USA a backwater; and all of those guys have been dead for at least 175 years.
Did Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin D. Roosevelt, et. al. make the United States of America a great nation? They have all been dead for 65 years or more and the moral, civil and cultural decline of America has been steady if not precipitous since then.
In his 13 April speech, President Obama actually said that it was the social programs such as Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid that made America a great nation. If you know history, you might be politically correct and say that this is a bit of "unfortunate" demagoguery. If you love Truth and Liberty, you must be forced to call it like it is — an absurd lie!
It was not men that made America great. It was the idea — the philosophical (Judeo-Christian) worldview. It was not men who commenced America's decline. It was the idea — the philosophical (secular/atheistic) worldview.
The Progressive Era (circa 1890-1929) was a transformational time in American history. Progressives set out to fundamentally change American culture from one rooted in the Anglo-American (Judeo-Christian) worldview philosophy to one set upon the flimsy (totalitarian) base of Franco-German (secular/atheist) worldview ideology. [More on this as this series "progresses."]
Very near the end of the 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama said more than twice that he wanted to "fundamentally change (or transform)" the United States of America. To every moral, educated and informed American, his meaning is now very clear. He wanted to revive the transformation from Liberty (Anglo-American, Judeo-Christian worldview) to socialism/tyranny (Franco-German, secular/atheistic worldview) that "Progressives" had started more than 100 years before, but which had sputtered somewhat since at least the 1980's.
In this series, I hope to expose the Big Lie. I will argue that "Progressive" (i.e., modern liberal) ideas, values, goals and principles are diametrical to American ideas. I will attempt to show that Anglo-American (Judeo-Christian) ideology produces Liberty and Justice, and is the only worldview philosophy that is conducive to both Liberty and Justice. Franco-German (secular/atheistic) ideology generates chaos, confusion and, ultimately, dependency and tyranny.
If you are open-minded, you will almost certainly disagree with me — maybe just on a few details, or perhaps fundamentally; to the core. I invite you to challenge me whenever you think I am wrong. I am often wrong. I am human. I want to learn from your perspective and insight. My mind is open, too. I only ask that you consider my perspective as I consider yours.
Vital Links:
Alexander's Essay
Walter Williams
Robert Meyer (see also, here and here.)
© Sam Weaver
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
