Here’s a long, but interesting essay on American history, and what perhaps lies ahead.
His formulation of multiple republics since 1787 makes a lot of sense to me, particularly since, though we haven’t written a new constitution, we have amended and misinterpreted it far beyond anything that the Founders envisioned for the nation. It’s pretty clear that both the War Between the States and the New Deal were major demarcation points from one governmental era to the next (Wilson was the first fascist American president, but even his era, even with the introduction of the federal income tax, didn’t end the post-war limits on government). And sadly, Reagan only temporarily slowed down the growth of the state, but didn’t end the era of what Delong calls the “Special Interest State.” Obama and the current Democrats may finally do so, however, in their overreaching. I certainly hope so.
Delong is optimistic that we may return to a true republic again in the next phase. I hope he’s right. But even if so, I fear a very ugly transition.
Delong is optimistic that we may return to a true republic again in the next phase. I hope he’s right. But even if so, I fear a very ugly transition.
I’m not a wing-nutter survivalist, by any stretch of the imagination. But I’ve really been assessing our current (and near-future) situation, and coming up with some pretty scary scenarios. Enough to make me want to start stockpiling. Food, weapons, ammo, survival books, etc.
I haven’t taken action yet, as the hyper-rational part of me is still dismissive of that kind of fear. But the gaps between dismissals are getting longer and longer.
I’ve started reading “Patriots” off-and-on for the last couple of weeks (in between my re-read of “Atlas Shrugged”). Interesting template of what to do, to say the least. He certainly understands the economic scenario, and doesn’t mince words about the potential collapse. Yeah, it’s a book. But I don’t think he’s as out in left field as I may have even a couple of years ago….
I think preparing for massive disruption of society is an investment. But because it is low likelihood (at least over the near future), one should be careful not to overinvest. I put aside 1% of my wealth for direct investment in survival. That might go up, if there’s more solid indications of real trouble (eg, the Cuban Missile Crisis).
I see a couple of important things to consider. First, that there are disruptions of society. Earthquakes, hurricanes, flooding, etc do happen. Financial disasters are also rather commonplace. Most of these are relatively easy to recover from, but it’s not a big stretch to expect disasters that aren’t so easy to recover from due to larger scale or more complete destruction.
Second, a lot of survival gear is multipurpose. A backup generator can serve when the power goes out due to a heat wave or a traffic accident down the street. A bomb shelter can serve as a storage shed. Camping gear is great for a weekend out. Guns can serve for self-defense any time. Gardens are a fun activity and give you some exercise outdoors.
As I see it, it’s not a bad idea to make some preparation for a breakdown in society. Further, with some thought, I think you can find ways to prepare that aren’t overly expensive and have some usefulness in day to day living.
See how the Revolutionary War, the Civil War and Second Thirty-Years War were the harbingers of the previous American Revolutions, it’s not crazy to be frightened of the possibilities.
But I don’t see a military challenge to America that brings fighting to our soil. But I do fear that the birth-blood of Fourth Republic (if it comes) will be written on our economy. Whether its hyperinflation or Great Depression II, or worse (riots, breakdown of the currency system, prolonged banking collapse, etc.).
I hope that what follows is a retreat to ordered liberty, rather than “rational” planning & special interests. I will fight for that. But I am not optimistic enough understand the need.
Despite being sympathetic to your general political tendencies and the Tea Parties in general, I have to object to De Long’s formulation as too cute by half. Words have meanings, and constitutional government is nothing but governance by the law of the word. We still operate under the same structure of government as was established by ratification in 1788, and imaginative re-formulations like this “Fourth American Republic” seem animated by envy of other countries’ more interesting political histories. It’s as if De Long would have preferred a colorful Alternate America where Hoover was hung by the neck upon a gallows erected in front of the Capitol on Inauguration Day in front of a beaming FDR.
Now I’d be willing to talk about zeitgeists and the various party systems until we form a new party system… which ought to come right before the poles finally melt. As much as I wish the Tea Partiers the best, the current party system is horribly resilient. I’m not even sure if it’s possible for one of the two major parties to collapse like the Federalists or the Whigs did, barring serious civil disorder.
I’m not even sure if it’s possible for one of the two major parties to collapse like the Federalists or the Whigs did, barring serious civil disorder.
“Serious civil disorder” is exactly the fear…
My thoughts on this are that as technology increases, an individual’s power is increasing faster than the power of society as a whole. This is inherently destabilizing. For example:
1. Tech level: knives. Person A disagrees with person B, and attacks with knife. Persons C-Z attack person A to defend the group’s interaction contract. Person A dies, person B is injured.
2. Tech level: guns. Person A disagrees with person B, and attacks with knife. Persons C-Z attack person A to defend the group’s interaction contract. Person A dies, person B and many others in the group die.
3. Tech level: pocket nukes. Person A disagrees with person B, and attacks with pocket nuke. Persons C-Z would attack person A to defend the group’s interaction contract, but unfortunately were all killed. Person A survives with those that agreed with him (or at least didn’t let on).
The safety against this is mutual respect and freedom. If person A is allowed to do his own thing as long as it doesn’t harm the others, person A has no motive to attack.
Of course, that means we have to off all the people that don’t show respect before the pocket nukes are finalized…