Ordered Liberty

On Saturday, Pontiac, questioned my use of the phrase ‘ordered liberty‘, saying this, ” Lastly, I’m intrigued, Dave, by the words “ordered liberty” used in your preface to Jessica’s article and that it could be a dream. Could you explain more on that because I find those 2 words together an oxymoron.” and that is good, when phrases like that are used, it is to convey a specific meaning, and if one is not to miss the point, one should question. Sadly, I gave him a fairly glib and off the top of my head answer. So let’s do better.

As it happens, on Sunday, our blog buddy Portly Politico touched on this very thing, saying:

Disorder” – Americans love to focus on our rights and our freedoms, but we often do so at the cost of understanding our obligations that flow from those rights.  We also tend to neglect that Burkean wisdom that liberty, to be truly liberty, must be ordered.  One of the most shocking elements of these riots is the continued violation of legitimate authority—of order.  The disorder and chaos these looters have unleashed threatens not just real people and property, but the very foundations of a stable, free society.

If we follow PP’s link above, we find ourselves looking at the work of Edmund Burke, the Father of English conservatism, and at least the uncle of American conservatism. As PP quotes he had much to say in his  Reflections on the Revolution in France written as the French Revolution got underway in 1789, he wrote with reference to the Queen of France:

“I thought ten thousand swords must have leaped from their scabbards to avenge even a look that threatened her with insult. But the age of chivalry is gone. That of sophisters, economists, and calculators, has succeeded; and the glory of Europe is extinguished forever. Never, never more, shall we behold that generous loyalty to rank and sex, that proud submission, that dignified obedience, that subordination of the heart, which kept alive, even in servitude itself, the spirit of an exalted freedom. The unbought grace of life, the cheap defence of nations, the nurse of manly sentiment and heroick enterprise is gone! It is gone, that sensibility of principle, that chastity of honour, which felt a stain like a wound, which inspired courage whilst it mitigated ferocity, which ennobled whatever it touched, and under which vice itself lost half its evil, by losing all its grossness.”

And here is as good an exposition of ordered liberty as one will find from its originator. Burke was an implacable foe of Revolutionary France, as was Pitt the Younger, but twenty years earlier he had been one of the staunchest allies of the Continental Congress to be found in Parliament, along with both Pitt and Charles James Fox, the only time the three agreed on anything.

The difference between the revolutions is vast, the Americans upholding the ancient rights of Englishmen, and vying for a return to the good old law, and the French overturning all convention with a drive for libertinism. Truthfully, exactly as BLM and Antifa are today.

In its basics, this dichotomy goes directly back to the Enlightenment where the French version sought to overturn all norms, creating radical personal freedom for elites by enslaving most of the population, while destroying all traditional things, the church, the family, personal responsibility, private property. The English/Scottish Enlightenment did none of this, it found a way to join ever-increasing personal freedom into the sinews of British society as well as Christianity, creating a free yet ordered society, as cognizant of its duties as it is of its liberties.

And yes, the modern world is built on the British model, because the two countries, the United Kingdom and the United States, who have led modernization since the eighteenth century, are the two countries who adopted Edmund Burke’s concept of ordered liberty. It is that fundamental. It is also the reason that the Regressives in all their multivariate hues, attempt to destroy the Anglo-Saxon powers above all else.

 

The Endgame

And so, according to Secondcitycop, this happened in Chicago last week:

Last Week’s Totals (5/31 – 6/6)
Shot & Killed: 29
Shot & Wounded: 138
Total Shot: 167
Total Homicides: 32

Total shot by the police in May and June: 0

Does anybody other than the rank and file of the CPD give a damn? Doesn’t look like it. This is an interview in Block Club Chicago (via SCC) with a lieutenant with almost thirty years service.

After battling civil unrest and looting last week, a Chicago Police lieutenant with almost 30 years on the job described a department “stretched thin,” lacking direction and fearing what could happen next.

In a wide-ranging interview, the lieutenant, who works in a North Side district but was stationed Downtown and on the South Side last week, agreed to talk to Block Club Chicago provided his identity and specific district not be disclosed.

In his almost three decades on the job, he’s never seen officers stretched so thin as they were controlling crowds at protests demanding justice for George Floyd and responding to looting, vandalism and violence across the city.

“I’ve been on almost three decades and have never experienced anything like this in my career. There’s some officers on their 10th day in a row working … 12-hour days,” he said before the weekend.

Read it all and be horrified.

I’d bet dollars I don’t have to doughnuts that it’s not very different in any of the blue city departments. There are reports that over a thousand NYPD cops have turned in their papers lately because they’ve had enough, and these aren’t the worst, can you imagine being a Minneapolis officer who wants to do a good job.

I’m hearing a lot of noise on the right bashing the police unions, usually I’m sympathetic. I’m no fan of public employee unions and for that matter neither was Walther Reuther or Franklin Roosevelt, but they are not the problem here.

The problem here is the city’s political and the police department’s leadership. As near as I can tell it has grown so corrupt as to be completely useless, and the blue states are no better. Some red states ain’t too hot either, but it’s an order of magnitude difference.

It’s kind of funny, reading SCC, they bash the union regularly but also recognize it’s their only chance of fair treatment from the city administration. Time to get real. The blue cities in the US; Chicago, New York, Detroit, Minneapolis, Seattle, San Fransisco, Los Angeles, and others. are essentially dead, nothing short of a voter revolt (and maybe not even that) can save them. But there is little sign that it is happening.

The only thing I can see to do is cordon them off as essentially no go zones, and let them kill each other off. Escape from New York come to life. We have enough to do to save the rest of the country. And that’s from a guy that has loved Chicago all my life.

AG Barr and Others Press Conference

I can’t speak for you, but I always find it interesting to hear what our government says, in a calm and reasoned manner, about problems facing our country. Yesterday Attorney General Barr and the leadership of the Department of Justice law enforcement agencies, bureaus, and such had to say about the current civil unrest in the United States. I still think AG Barr is pretty much of a straight shooter, if so this should be the truth as he sees it. One hopes so. Here is the press conference. I think it worth an hour of your time.

Cousins’ Wars

images (1)

Our last British flag and the flag raised on Jully 4th, 1776

Audre innocently opened up a big can of worms yesterday with her post about her friend and bringing up the Civil War. Is there anything in American history, more compelling than that war, its people and causes in American history? I don’t think so, from children to adults, even to American soldiers (with whom I have occasionally spent rewarding nights, and we were still going over eggs and beer for breakfast.

But the most amazing thing is that it often seems to affect the British the same way, even granting that Ken Burns is a most gifted storyteller. But why? Sure, it was important for both countries, but it’s deeper than that, so let’s back up a bit. My former co-blogger, Jessica, is English, well actually Welsh, and this post is one that talked about English speaking revolutions. I think it also has bearing on the present in both countries, as the same messages are stirring about.

So, to echo Audre, let’s see what you think.

Last spring in one of our posts commemorating the life of Maggie Thatcher, Jess said this:

Here I will raise hackles. Americans, being the product of a revolution, cannot be true conservatives. America owes its existence to a rebellion against lawfully constituted authority, so American and British Conservatism are bound to differ. Mrs Thatcher was, indeed, the closest Britain has produced to an American style Conservative, but she always was different to many in her party, and the fact that that is true today says nothing about her legacy and everything about the enduring deep-rootedness of native British Conservatism and its respect for the authority of the Crown.

Which didn’t sound quite right to me then, although I saw her point. It still doesn’t and today we’re going to talk about why, for maybe the very first time here, Jess was wrong. Not that we aren’t successors of revolutionaries, we are, and conservative ones at that. Lady Astor wasn’t all that far wrong when we said that the Revolution was fought by “British Americans against a German King for British ideals”.

The real problem with Jess’s statement is that so is she, every bit as much as we are. So if that means we can’t be true conservatives, neither can she, or any Briton.

Let’s work this out a bit.

The title comes from The Cousins’ Wars by Kevin Phillips, and I suspect this will turn into sort of an irregular series. A lot of what Phillips says is backed up by what Daniel Hannan, MEP says in his Inventing Freedom: How the English Speaking Peoples Made the Modern World, those are the sources for most of this. Both of which I recommend highly especially Inventing Freedom.

What we are positing here is that the English Civil War (including the quasi-legal regicide) with its follow-on of the Glorious Revolution had exactly the same cause (and for the most part sides) as the second English Civil war (the one we call the American Revolution) and even pretty much the same players and thinking animated the American Civil War. By the time William and Mary were given the throne, it was pretty obvious that the monarch was the creation of Parliament.

Cromwell’s support (as did he) came most strongly from the Eastern Association, centered in East Anglia, and the borderlands of England and Scotland, which were also strangely, or not, where most of the strongest Patriots in the Revolution came from. In fact, many of their ancestors had returned to England to fight with Cromwell. From East Anglia came the dissenters who made up the Congregationalists of New England, and from the borderlands came the Scots-Irish (as we call them) and especially the low church Anglicans of Virginia. In many cases, these were second sons of the lower aristocracy who would not be inheriting the family estates because of primogeniture. This pattern persisted down through the American Civil War as well, and is greatly important in seeing how America became Britain intensified.

And in truth, the Revolution divided England in very much the same manner as it did the colonies. Hannan tells us:

In 1775, William Pitt the Elder proposed to repeal every piece of legislation that the American Patriots had found objectionable, beginning with the Sugar Act, and to recognize the Continental Congress as, in effect, as an American parliament, coequal with Britain’s

This would have been, essentially, Commonwealth status, and it would very likely have been accepted.

Not to put too fine a point on it though, this battle has been the one that made the Anglosphere the preeminent supporter of liberty in the world. Nor was it a new fight in the seventeenth century either. Tacitus tells us, in Hannan’s words:

The primitive German tribes, he wrote, were in the habit of deciding their affairs through open air clan meetings. Their chiefs were not autocrats, but governors by consent Their rule rested on auctoritas (the ability to inspire) rather than postestas (the power to compel). Their peoples were not subjects but free and equal participants in the administration of their affairs.

Feudalism overcame this in the eleventh and twelfth centuries all over Europe, except in Great Britain, Switzerland, and parts of Scandinavia. Even in England, it was dealt a nearly mortal blow in 1066. The wonderful stories of charters (including Magna Charta), the Peasant’s Revolt (which was certainly misnamed because there were no peasants in England) and all the rest is the story of the recovery of ancient rights and principles.

The other thing that has always struck me is this: What the French call “les anglo-saxons”, which is all of the core (UK, USA, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia), Anglosphere is different. In truth, for a great part we in the United States are wont to talk of “American Exceptionalism”, and it’s true enough. But a better term might be Anglosphere exceptionalism. Our revolutionaries have always operated on the old meaning of revolution, the one we use in engineering, to complete the revolution so that it is upright again. They have always been conservative, in American Constitutional terms: Originalist. Which is completely different from the French and Russian revolutions which sought to destroy the old order. We have always sought to restore.

And we still do

 

And yes, there will be several more of these, which are repeat posts from 2013 and 14. As we look over our parapets, or perhaps more cogently, peek between the drawn curtains in our house arrest, well such a life is both unEnglish and unAmerican,  and I doubt our peoples will submit very long, and any government that tries is very foolish, indeed.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Drowning Leviathan

In yesterday’s American Spectator, Donald Devine notes in an important article that:

The government’s Washington Post command center recently used its powerful front page to announce that big government was back.

Post chief political correspondent Dan Balz explained that the coronavirus crisis has changed everything. “The role of government has changed overnight.” It represents the “biggest expansion of government authority in generations,” a transformation supported by both political parties. Although his support for the expansion was clear, Balz conceded a “huge debate” is still to come where the

battle will be waged on terms that could be far different from those before the pandemic — terms that have held sway since President Ronald Reagan arrived in Washington four decades ago determined to put advocates of a vigorous government on the defensive for the first time since the New Deal.

Yeah, no. What bat flu has shown up is just how useless the federal government is.

[T]he coronavirus pandemic was fought almost entirely at the state level. Why? The states and especially local governments have millions of health employees to fight a pandemic while the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have a few hundred. The private sector contributed even more personnel millions to fight the pandemic. Rather than fighting social problems with the usual soothing political platitudes and media bromides, the pandemic reality required actual resources to do the work.

In short, the virus came at us in the usual way, and in most of the country, we defeated it in the old usual American way. With a team of local and state officials backed by the private sector, working around (however they could) the blockades and impediments imposed by the federal government. The big-government advocates a limned in New York and California, Illinois, and Michigan, have cost their citizens millions, if not billions in terms of income, they have cost many of their elderly their lives, and they have substantially tried to reduce the freedom of Americans.

There will be no debate, the left will scream and shout their lies, along with the deep state, and Americans will remember the definition of an expert, A failure, with a degree, hiding in the bureaucracy, almost always doing the wrong thing, at the wrong time, to the wrong people.

First, President Trump resuscitated a law to override his predecessor’s new regulations and then began systematically lifting regulatory burdens administratively across the board, producing the longest economic recovery in history with the lowest unemployment. In the face of businesses closings for the pandemic, the Administration then proposed an across the board further loosening of government restrictions on labor relations, workplace safety, the environment, and healthcare rather than advancing more big government.

That’s worth a thought. Can you imagine how desperate we would be if this had happened before 20 January 2017? We’ve had three years of phenomenal growth to cushion the shock of the damage done to us, by China, seemingly spending American money, to try to dominate the world. And the “elite experts’ really think we’re going to let them run rampant now.

There are a few presidents who have effected history substantially, Washington, Lincoln, Coolidge, Reagan, and now Trump. There are also several presidents who have inflicted substantial damage on the country, Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Johanson, and Carter.

The American people are pretty pragmatic, overall, we tend to back winners and delete losers, has that changed? I doubt it. But it never happens without struggle, and this one will be an epic, as we attempt to roll back an entire century of regression.

Hopefully, I’m wrong, but it never hurts to: Buy more Ammo.

Freedom is a precious thing, and we have ripped the mask off the big state’s advocates, they stand opposed to the freedom of the people. Lincoln said it well (as usual):

We say we are for the Union. The world will not forget that we say this. We know how to save the Union. The world knows we do know how to save it. We — even we here — hold the power, and bear the responsibility. In giving freedom to the slave, we assure freedom to the free — honorable alike in what we give, and what we preserve. We shall nobly save, or meanly lose, the last best hope of earth. Other means may succeed; this could not fail. The way is plain, peaceful, generous, just — a way which, if followed, the world will forever applaud, and God must forever bless.”

Sunday Funnies, Quarantine Week 7

And so, seven weeks in, yep that\s all just seven weeks, it only seems like 5 years, so far.

But hey, this happened this week, ostensibly to salute our first responders but mostly, I suspect because they knew we needed something great.

Leading, of course, to this

Which led to comments on naval aviators ability to land safely crash controllably.

She seems nice!

Life without social distancing

An invitation to Darwin’s Law

Meanwhile at XiNN

And, of course

%d bloggers like this: