Is liberalism a cover up for a new dictatorship? Editorial "EL DIESTRO"


We may extol the virtues of liberalism to the highest levels, but a question still would remain unanswered: is liberalism a cover up for a new dictatorship? Undoubtedly, globalisation has unleashed a new dictator which Jefferson had predicted, and whether or not Jefferson coined it, we may well consider that it was Jefferson who did, or he was involved in it some way or another.

I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it rightly belongs.

The founding fathers had three main issues at hand to worry about after the Independence War: to give the government to the people was not an option because it may lead to a mobocracy. With a Bible in one hand, they could not forget that it was a mob who had crucified Jesus. Power in the hands of the one was also as bad an option as the former one because they had been fighting a King. And power in the hands of the few could not be trusted either because they did not receive representation from the group of representatives which should have defended their rights in the English Parliament.

So what they did is to take a melting pot and put the three of them together but in perpetual tension. Power in the hands of the one was given to a President-elect, power in the hands of the few was given to the Senate and power in the hands of the many was given to the Congress.

Some great thinkers from the past became a part of the melting pot helping in the process of the political birth of the new nation; like Machiavelli, who had separated morals from politics, therefore, separating religion and state or Hobbes, who took over Machiavelli´s job. Hobbes was the architect of the power in the hands of the one, thus building the notion of the modern state. Locke, who realised that the power could be divided and, above all, Montesquieu, who separated and confronted the forces of power to be in a mechanical balanced constant tension.

From the “no taxation without representation”, which sparkled the great American Revolution to the founding fathers, who put into practice the theories of those ancient great political philosophers, there was a great way of sacrifice, blood and struggle to reach freedom and liberty. They founding fathers came into the arena of history to the extent that never in the history of humanity pragmatism, patriotism, and good will had reached such high standards. I see them all, the founding fathers, gathering and discussing with the group of practical political philosophers of the past. I can see them discussing the future of the nation in search of the happiness for the people. I'm sure they sat there thinking – So, Now what? What do we do with our liberty? And they did a very good jog. A great one.

And here again, Jefferson foresaw and predicted the topic of globalisation and how the market in the global village would affect the people. So the question remaining now is how “power should be taken from the banks” as Jefferson put it. Where do we find a new Montesquieu who would seize this tyrant and separate its powers in a new melting pot to confront the financial issues in constant tension to achieve the happiness of the many? Where are the new founding fathers? Political power was a monster with three heads which had never been tamed but eventually was. How many heads does financial power have and would it ever be tamed at all?

Share on Google Plus

About El Diestro

El Diestro es el primer medio de comunicación editado por la sociedad civil. Somos el referente de la derecha política española.

1 comentarios :

  1. In the States, each day more and more of the so called liberals are, in fact commies in the closet. As for the American Banks, they still are not the country biggest corporations, but because of the automotion crisis, GM's mess and all,they are on well their way...

    ResponderEliminar