Why is localism important? | AECR

For us as Americans there is nothing new or novel about what is stated here. We are inclined to refer to it by its third name: Federalism. And as such it is one of the principles our founders used to help us maintain our freedom.

It’s interesting, I think, that one of the things the statist have done is to centralize power in Washington where they can mandate things and we (the people) have much less influence than their buddies in business, big labor, and yes, big law. That undoubtedly leads to corruption on a vast scale, here as it does in Europe.

So, while there is nothing new here, it does a very good job of stating the elementary reasons why local control of almost everything is such a good safeguard for the average citizen.

How subsidiarity inspires civic engagement – and thereby good democracy

Where Conservative governance is, in a word, subsidiarity; Socialist governance is centralisation. The AECR’s Reykjavik Declaration explains how subsidiarity “favours the exercise of power at the lowest practicable level – by the individual where possible, by local or national authorities in preference to supranational bodies.” […]

One only has to participate in a European election campaign to hear the number of pleas about “the pot holes down the lane”…

… and a true Conservative never patronises this! Here we find the Burkean heart of subsidiarity: the love and reverence of the local. It does not presume to impose principles from a centralised high tower. Socialism is so determined on redistribution between localities that it reductively quantifies them, not caring to truly look at them. When fairness is measured numerically, communities are soon reduced to numbers, before an alien hand from the centre reaches in and unintentionally desecrates.

Why is localism important? | AECR.


About NEO
Lineman, Electrician, Industrial Control technician, Staking Engineer, Inspector, Quality Assurance Manager, Chief Operations Officer

10 Responses to Why is localism important? | AECR

  1. Federalism sadly appears far from the average American! Though rock on Tennessee and Idaho!

    Liked by 1 person

  2. the unit says:

    Well, anyone who has lived very much into adult hood in the USA could give an example of how important local control is. But also local adherence by local governance to having to live with the same law as the little people. Without going into the details, Florida was considering a law proposed by a certain business entity that would make mandatory inspections for a certain thing thereby increasing their business. And the state would charge a fee as well The county commissioners here and around the state realized they were subject to the demands of the law. They agreed with the citizens and across Florida and they demanded the law not be passed. It didn’t.

    Liked by 1 person

    • NEO says:

      That’s a lot of it, I suspect. Local officials have a lot more trouble avoiding living under the same laws as their constituents, than say Congresscritters do. Good point, there.

      Liked by 1 person

      • the unit says:

        Congresscritters just have to be careful where they buy the exercise equipment. 🙂

        Liked by 1 person

        • NEO says:

          Yep 🙂

          Liked by 1 person

  3. the unit says:

    Anyway the interest is starting to stir for the next Presidential election. I read yesterday the top Google question is…”Is Hillary Clinton married?” Hope and change for us huh?

    Liked by 1 person

    • NEO says:

      You’d never know it from how Bill acts.:)

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Subsidiarity implies both localism and centralisation. The most practicable level to exercise power on certain issues is going to be national or international and this will create the necessity for forms of scrutiny by which these levels of governance are held accountable. That such centralised bodies will tend to accumulate ever more power to themselves and that the forms of scrutiny will themselves be remote from microcommunities and individuals is true but that does not mean that we can entirely dispense with such overarching bodies. The challenge really is to pre-load the system in such a way as to limit possibilities for excessive aggrandisement by such bodies and to effectively deconstruct them every few decades or so and reconstruct them from the ground up in the light of the then current conditions and the experience gained over the preceding period.


    • NEO says:

      Yep, it is. Not to sound like a broken record, that is why we have the Federal Government as a government of limited powers, mostly to do with common defense and matters of legitimate interstate commerce.Lots of our problems trace back to many other things moving to Washington, which would be done better by the plenary state government or even on the county level.

      Sory about the delay, as well.


  5. Pingback: My Article Read (4-16-2015) | My Daily Musing

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s