ClaysAmerica.com

Barack Obama rejects individual freedom, saying: THE INTERESTS OF COMMUNITY ARE MORE IMPORTANT THAN ARE THE INTERESTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL and OUR INDIVIDUAL SALVATION DEPENDS ON OUR COLLECTIVE SALVATION. Yet, America's prosperity owes its success to individual freedom, to pebble droppers free to work their miracles in a free market. That made America different.

SMALL, LIMITED GOVERNMENT WORKS BEST
Ours was a system of self-government, not something imposed on us by an iron fist from afar, as was the Old World’s custom. It is what made us so different from all other nations. It is the growing gap between legislators and those governed by them, as the disease of abuse of power. It is the abuse of power by the few over the many that harpoons the life and efforts of free, creative geniuses that stand apart from the community or herd, providing us with prosperity above all other nations. The American ideal of the supremacy of individual interests over the interests of community is most important, and small, limited government protects individuals.

WHO ARE THE RADICALS?
The world is steeped in the tradition of class separation where the few elite rule the many. As the rulers proclaim, it is for everyone’s own good. Anyone who disturbs what has become a natural order of things, where community interests are more important than are individual interests, is a radical, like those who operate their boats at high speed leaving wakes and making waves that disturb other boats tied secure to their traditional moorings. The speeders are radicals. America was just such a radical speeding amongst other nations moored to their traditions who seek only equilibrium.

In time, most Old World nations have found an alliance of rulers, business and labor, as in mercantilism, to provide the greatest, well-managed equilibrium for their nations. However, in a free, unmanaged, uncontrolled business environment, creative individuals can start new businesses. They are upstarts challenging the market positions of long established businesses. It is radical behavior on the part of individuals free to pursue their own interests, skills, talents, inequalities and aspirations. It creates a burdensome encounter where change to the established and accepted methods and practices occur often. In short, it gives the world another America, a New World of individual freedom, where community interests, as defined by the elite few, is less important.

From the Pilgrim’s landing in 1620, America became the New World leaving the Old World traditions behind. There was elbowroom for individuals to pursue their fantasies, as long as they harmed no one else. They moved fast. They challenged old ways and practices, providing new and better ways to do things. They went around or over those who tried to slow them down and left behind many bobbing vessels straining at their moorings. They created greater prosperity than known anywhere in the Old World. They were the radicals so hated by the Old World traditionalists found in the modern Democrat Party in America and over the entire world.

PATH OF DREAMS
Our nation formed around a novel idea, that each of us is born equal in the sight of our Creator and our laws. That is how we began. It is after our birth that the novelty of America really shines. First, we give up our equality. Then, we develop unique inequalities as we grow and learn. America is novel even more because it provides a pathway of dream fulfillment so each of us can pursue our inequalities in freedom. We are able to pursue our own individual dreams and chose our path. Our inequalities are not just negatives, unless we chose to see them that way. We become unequal, not superior, in our intelligence, education, health, growth, abilities and temperaments as we change our interests, talents, skills, aspirations, needs, wants and the dreams they fashion for us. America is a land of broad boulevards and paths that allow and encourage each of us to be the best we can be, as individuals, living in harmony with our fellows.

To keep those paths we must stop the expansion of government. We need to free the whole domain of private activity from government influence, except as it prevents injustice. Only on this condition can we succeed in keeping our liberty or assuring the free play of the harmonious laws God has decreed for development and prosperity of the American people. The 1620 gift God gave to America was an opportunity for people to start all over again and promote that natural order mentioned by Jefferson. They were given an opportunity to create their own government to serve their own interests. For them to control their government, it had to be close, that is, within reach. It had to be limited to preventing injustice, not providing justice or remodeling mankind. This is precisely what separates America from the rest of the world.

AMERICAN POLITICS

There are only two sides in politics. Just two! One side is where a few elite believe they have the right answers for managing all the people. They have many prescriptions and they battle each other over who is correct. They share one common belief, which is ordinary people cannot manage their lives without help from them. The other side has one policy. It says leave the folks alone and they will find their own way, that they are all capable.

The elite think we are not capable of being free to find our own way. We are bad people who prey on each other like starving cannibals. We need elite, like an Obama, Castro, Stalin or Mao to guide us. Because they believe in the ugly and sinful nature of men, if allowed to develop freely, will lead society toward injustice, pauperism, and inequality. Their answer, then, must be a few elite ruling the many. One supporter of the elite’s hate people view said, “My thought about nature, history, and society is guided by the assumption (based on repeated and studious observation) of strife, conflict, struggle, as the pre-eminent character of life and existence.” This view is shared by all on the left.

George Washington was chosen first president under our third constitution. Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton joined Washington’s administration. Jefferson was Hamilton’s leading opponent and the assumed leader of what was later identified as Democrats. Hamilton led the Federalists. Our American political differences began with these two men and their beliefs.

Hamilton believed in a strong central government, a national bank, government and business formed much like the mercantilists in Europe, and themselves as the elite managers of people. From Hamilton we get Henry Clay, then Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt and the Progressives, then Taft, Hoover, Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush, Bush and McCain. Reagan was more a 19th century Democrat.

Hamilton was no friend of our final Constitution, and certainly not the Bill of Rights. He and his Federalists were Nationalists and elite managers. They wanted nothing to limit government and looked down at the ordinary man and woman. After the First Amendment was adopted, the Federalists ignored it and passed the Sedition Act which imprisoned and fined editors for saying bad things about the government.

The Federalist Party all but vanished after the death of Hamilton, morphing into the Whigs then the Ripon Republicans in 1854, becoming the Republican Party. Hamiltonian ideals were sustained for two centuries, by Republicans and then modern Democrats. The Hamilton and Clay alliance became the basis of the Whigs and then the National Republican Party, then a rival to the 19th century Democrat party. They favored tariffs to protect U.S. manufacturers, pay for federal public works, especially roads. This was European mercantilism more than an American free market.

Abraham Lincoln and the new Republican party revived Henry Clay's Hamiltonian program, the American System, using an active meddling government elite to modernize the economy. It was a Hamiltonian nationalistic opposition to the state’s sovereignty ideals of the early Democrats, taking us to the Civil War.

Congress created tariffs to promote industries in the Northeast, build markets for western foodstuffs and southern cotton. It called for a national bank to provide ample circulating currency and federal subsidies for internal improvement projects, such as clearing of rivers, construction of roads and canals to facilitate the movement of goods through the nation. They wanted a managed supply of paper currency and lower interest rates on bank loans, and for public funds, even debt, to build or improve transportation infrastructures. These were European, government and business alliances or mercantilist ideas rejected by 19th century Democrats who favored a free market.

Republicans wanted to grow the economy in a well-planned, managed and organized way, by all-knowing elite managers. Whigs also believed that government-planned economic development would increase individuals' choices of career opportunities available to them. This was never the purpose of the federal government, however.

From 1800 to 1900, we have the 19th century Democrats from Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, Martin Van Buren, and James Polk to Grover Cleveland. They were our first libertarians.

Jefferson led a coalition, the 1800 Revolution, to oppose the economic and foreign policies of the Federalists as well as repeal the Sedition Act. The Democrats insisted on a strict construction of the Constitution, denouncing the national bank, as unconstitutional. They favored states' sovereignty and the supremacy of the ordinary man over bankers, industrialists, merchants, and other moneyed interests. Democrats dominated Congress and most state governments; it was weakest in the Northeast.

Jefferson and Madison, through the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions, announced the “Principles of 1798,” which became the founding expressions of their party. The most important of these principles were states' rights, opposition to a strong national government, skepticism in regard to the federal courts, and opposition to a National Bank. Democrats saw their opponents as supporters of an aristocracy, not of the people.

The original Democrats were never involved in expanding the central government’s powers or of privileged class influences and imperialism, as some have suggested. Hamilton’s Federalists called them "Democrats" or "Jacobins" to associate them with radicals and mob rule, and the excesses of the French Revolution, just as is said about Tea Party people today.

Modern Democrats still celebrate Jefferson-Jackson day dinners, whose policies differ so much from Democrats today. Beginning in 1890, Democrats shifted left to a party of economic populism; saying they represented the so-called interests of the “little man,” and the unions. Republicans were the pro-business, mercantilist party. Both parties, by the early 20th century, squeezed out any influence of the 19th century Democrats and began diluting their principles of individual freedom.

Congressman Wright Patman from Texas led the Democrats in fighting the Chain Stores, like Penney’s, Kroger and Safeway threatening the mom and pop stores, when the big stores, from an economy of scale gave the “little man” the best quality products a the lowest price, in the same way the corporate farm would later do for the “folks.” Democrats supported the Old World Unionists and socialists who corrupted our education system.

Americans, for over 300 years, followed what the Transactional Psychologists described as the healthy view of people, that “I am OK, you are OK.” This rose out of our Judeo-Christian founding that we are individuals and we treat others as we would have them treat us. Because of this view, and the willingness to step aside when a creative wave and wake-maker is coming by, without envy, America created a free market which made it the most prosperous nation in the world.

The left, the socialists and modern Democrats, claim the interests of community are more important than are the interests of the individual. They believe they, the small elite, are OK and the rest of us are not OK. Therefore, it is essential to them that the form of government permits a few elite, a small group of shepherds, to rule the many, that the average person should have no say in their own government. This is what they want and are establishing in their 21st century constitution. The lawyers have decided that judges should rule, like cowboys managing their herds.

19th century Democrat positions, supporting individual freedom and local government, reflect the ideals of today’s Tea Party movement. The legitimate self-interests of each individual are more important, to Tea Partiers, than are the interests of the community. The Tea Party movement reflects more the policies of the 19th Century Jefferson Democrats, not modern Democrats and not Republicans.

Sean Hannity says, “We need to go back to our roots” with the GOP, and that is wrong. Our roots are with the 19th century Democrats, and they no longer exist unless the Tea Party movement can change the GOP to reflect it. We can only hope the Tea Party movement grows and the elections that follow put in place those who believe as the Tea Party movement believes. Our freedoms and prosperity depend upon the Tea Party movement today.

HOW CAN I BE SURE?
How can I be sure I am an individual, separate from and of greater value than the herd? Obama says community and herd interests are more important than my interests. That must mean I am not alive separate of the community or herd. Yet, I am aware of my own existence and how I stand in my part of the world. I am able to love people and things others may not see. I have interests that are unique to me. I have values defining my path in life that reflect me, as I am. My enthusiasm is my own, not equal to others. That must mean individual freedom surpasses communalism, which says I am equal to others. That unlocks my inequalities to grow and benefit myself and those around me. Therefore, I know I am alive!

FOUR QUESTIONS TO ANSWER.
Are community interests more important than individual interests?
Should government provide justice or prevent injustice?
Is the pursuit of equality more important than pursuing inequalities?
Is individual freedom more important than government running the community?

1. POLITICS A TWO SIDED COIN

Tea Partiers believe the interests of individuals is more important than are those of the community. When individuals prosper, their families and communities prosper. Obama Democrats believe community interests are more important. As elite, they can better define and govern community interests. Government serves the interests of the herd.

2. LABELS FOR EACH SIDE

Left, right, middle, socialist, communist, fascist, monarchist are Old World labels where a few elite rule the many. The New World is where the many rule themselves in individual freedom. Which side has worked best?

3. TWO TRADITIONS RESULT

The longest world tradition is a few elite rule the many, the Old World. The New World began in 1620 with individual freedom. The new tradition produced prosperity and happiness never experienced before. Which is better?

4. THE NEW WORLD SIDE

Frederick Bastiat, a nineteenth century French legislator, said, “All men’s impulses, when motivated by legitimate self-interest, fall into a harmonious social pattern.” People's self-interests are, by nature and experience, harmonious with community. If people’s interests are harmonious, liberty is necessary and no one should interfere with their interests. Community should not block their interests or try to redirect them. America proved him right! Conservatives and libertarians support this. Democrats want to destroy this.

5. THE OLD WORLD SIDE

Auguste Comte believed people should not do as they please and pursue their own interests, as community is reality and individuals unimportant. Like Rousseau, Marx and Obama, he believed men are like bees and ants, none able to survive doing as they pleased. Self-interests, they believed, are antagonistic and community must rule through elite rulers.

6. IS THERE A CENTRIST SIDE?

Individuals reach beyond their grasp, pursue their own legitimate interests, use skills, talents and aspirations so families and close communities prosper. Middle or moderate views discourages their freedom for some tyranny, hoping it will not expand. Where is a middle ground?

7. WHEN THE NEW WORLD SIDE BEGAN

A group of families, a church resettlement, with the Geneva Bible as its constitution, started America in 1620. People were free to make their own way in a new and uncertain land. The American dream was born. Ordinary people could own land. They could follow their own interests, talents, skills and aspirations in freedom.

8. INFLUENCES SHAPING THE NEW WORLD

America was not a result of the European Enlightenment of the 1700’s. It grew from an enlightenment of experience starting in 1620 New England. People were free to own property and its product. They farmed, created, built, manufactured and traded freely. They schooled their children to develop their skills. They prospered free of Old World limitations. They formed small governments suited to their experiences and needs. America’s Free Market grew from willing exchanges. They never intended government to mediate or intervene in their behaviors, other than to prevent injustice.

9. PEBBLE-DROPPING WAVE-MAKERS WELCOMED

America, one out of two hundred of the world’s nations, with only five percent of the world’s population, has twenty-five percent of the world’s wealth. No rulers prevented Americans from thinking out of the bubble and acting out of the box. They can be the nails sticking up that Old World governments hammer down. They can make a wake and rock the boat free of restraints. They could drop pebbles and cause ripples in placid waters. They defined community interests when pursuing legitimate self-interests. They rejected slavery of the many to the rule of the few. Pebble droppers created America's prosperity and still do as entrepreneurs.

10. CAN BOTH SIDES COMPROMISE?

Should community interests really trump self-interests? This is our political question and conflict in America today. Is individual legitimate self-interest or the interests of the community most important? Can there be a balance? America already proved the best model of political reality in the world, so why is it fair and just we rid ourselves of some freedom to satisfy the envy of the Old World? Is the proof of the failure of the Old World side and the success of the New World side yet not enough?

11. WHY ELITE HATE CHRISTIANS

The Christmas Revolution began 2,000 years ago with the birth of Jesus. His teachings were a rebellion against Old World governing concepts. He taught sovereignty of the individual with interests and aspirations unique to each, individual freedom limited by the Golden Rule and a belief that "I'm OK, you're OK." It was a new world order and spread 1620 years after it began by a small band of Pilgrims settling in Massachusetts. It proved successful. Individual interests and freedom to pursue life, liberty and prosperity proved harmonious in American communities. Americans rejected the power of the few elite in whose arrogance thought they could do better. Because of its teachings, Christianity is targeted for defeat by those who believe community interests are more important than are individual interests. Its celebration is ridiculed and prohibited in America today. The New World, founded on the Christmas Revolution, proved freedom and prosperity. The Old World, on the other hand, prefers slavery and chains for the many.

12. WHY ELITE HATE AYN RAND

Is self-centered greed or legitimate self-interest the main concern with Ayn Rand's beliefs? Many say she promoted selfishness, thereby greed, which is self-centered and anti-individual creativity. That is anti-Rand. Rand admired the creative individual, people like railroad builder James Jerome Hill, on whom she was reputed to have based her Taggart characters in Atlas Shrugged. Independent “I’m OK, you’re OK” people are OK with Rand, not the criminal takers. If we look at Howard Roark’s summation to the jury, from Fountainhead, we do not see a self-centered individual destroying his work. If he was greedy he would have simply accepted his payment. We see an other- and outer-centered individual in love with his own dreams and creations, as one would love a spouse, child or family and refuse to allow them to be assaulted. That is the kind of self-interest that built America. Though love for anything spiritual may be missing, a great idea or vision also measures up to that which is spiritual, beyond self, and that view is not inconsistent with Christianity.

13. TWO OR ONE TIER SOCIETY

America dissolved the two tier social structure that still exists in the rest of our world. It was the major deterrent to economic progress in the world, because it shut off adventure by the many ruled by the few. The two tier, elite and powerful few ruling the weak many in the social herd, meant no one should stand above their fellows in each tier. No one could safely challenge the accepted and established way things operated. There was no attraction to do so, no pulling a single individual forward into uncharted waters, only the fear of being punished. America, without an elite and powerful few ruling the herd, experienced what it was like for free men and women to think out of the social bubble and act out of the box, become pebble-droppers and try to fly in so many areas of interest, that progress was the unavoidable result. This is what the 19th century libertarian Democrats fought to retain for America that the 20th century Democrats are trying to destroy.

14. INDIVIDUALS IN COMMUNITY

Sometime in the beginning, when men and women first settled on the earth, they started having sparks of creative genius and ideas to make life easier. Men amplified their energy and increased their productivity with tools they created. Other men feared the genius of the individual. They shared their fears with others in community. They struck out at anyone challenging the way community did things. Men were afraid of the genius each had but could not understand.

All through the centuries, few had the courage to think out of the community bubble and live out of its box. Community created taboos and restrictions to protect its culture. Each new idea and improvement upset long accepted and established traditions. The creative and inventive men often died for their genius. They were the nails sticking up that community hammered flat. That fear of offending gods and rulers, with the product of a single man’s genius, ruled the community. Even so, some men would continue to pursue an itch, even threatened by death.

No change ever rose from a desire to please community. Community feared the source, the creative mind living free of their control. Genius was madness, witchcraft, a sickness that had to vanish. Genius went beyond the control of rulers, gods and other men. The product of genius, rarely accepted at first, glorified individuals as children of God. Individual consciousness could not exist apart from an individual’s self-interests.

The fear of individual genius was a unifying force of rulers of community interests. Community interests grew from internalized fear and superstition, as well as externalized threats from those who rule. Community interests rise from a tradition and culture of fear. Fear shapes the interests of community. Individuals, however, must think and act from their own interests. They cannot be compelled to work and create, except from their own interests and motives. Their creative intelligence is not a product of self-sacrifice. Creative genius must be independent of the rule and opinion of others. Whatever we have today, as tools to make life easier, came from the genius of self-serving individuals dropping pebbles in the pond and rocking the boat while making waves.

Every disruption in the prosperity of a community came from community attempts to interfere in the individual’s genius and self-interest. Most people believe individual self-interest, because it stands apart, is the enemy of community interest and the interests of the ruler. The world has lived on baby steps to progress, to peace and prosperity, because of its fear of the individual.

America’s political and sociological departure from the ordinary history of man began 400 years ago when it recognized individual freedom in America. Each person had "unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” given them by their Creator, not the ruler. The ruler was absent, the Creator always near. America allowed each to make their interests real. American genius invented and produced. They did not plunder others or memorialize their genius. Americans prospered, as did their families, communities, states and nation. Individual legitimate self-interest proved best, out of all of man’s history, for the interests and prosperity of community.

The world is crumbling again, under a religious belief in self-sacrifice. Many claim community, nation and world interests are more important than self-interest. They challenge the right of individuals to exist for their own sake. Genius is condemned again as selfish and something to be feared. Communities have only prospered without conflict when genius is free. It suffers when individual freedom is gone.

Why did it take so long for the world to discover that free individuals make it a better place to live? The new Americans lived by the moral code of the Ten Commandments and the Golden Rule. It defined our early New England pioneers. A tradition based upon those moral codes took root. It established beliefs, habits, customs and ways of doing things. Families were the core communities. As families gained levels of prosperity never known in the Old World, their larger communities prospered. Prosperity from freedom, not dictatorship, was the gift of America, the New World.

Pioneer Americans created what they needed. They traded, invented and built their lives without meddling bureaucrats. They made laws, hired police officers, courts and jails in each of their communities. Local home-rule government was to prevent injustice. All children had to be educated and skill-trained in the many schools they built. Teachers encouraged and taught them to pursue their own individual genius, interests, skills, talents and aspirations.

America’s Declaration of Independence expressed a tradition of community structure. It was not something people had to accept. It reflected the beliefs of 150 years experience with individual freedom. The Enlightenment was a product of America, not of a handful of European philosophers. Americans created a tradition, stood on their own, supported their families and communities without a recipe of a ruler or church. Those prospering helped those who did not. They did not fear genius, invention and entrepreneurial dream-chasing. It was a tradition that built the most productive, creative and prosperous nation in the world. It was a reflection of individual freedom.

In the past 100 years, Old World supporters have been trying to change America by ridiculing and demeaning its traditions. They want a return to traditions based on fear, anger, envy and greed. They want the power to manage our nation, which will surely result in the kind of poverty and misery so well known in the Old World.

Americans are now confused over which is most important. Is community interests or legitimate self-interests most important? Community we know has no interests, except fear and the threats of displeasing rulers. Only individuals have interests and passions. Many Americans still know freedom of individuals to chase dreams, use genius and skills, is most important. An infection of doubt has taken place, however. Schools, media, politicians and entertainment have infected the thinking of Americans. Once, we believed that local government, democratic and closest to the governed, was best. The productivity of free individuals once made sense. Today, too many are looking to a central government for guidance, handouts and relief from their problems. Americans are selling their birthright for thirty pieces of silver

The supporters of community interests believe they are elites who must plan and manage. They cannot accept that free actions of individuals in community can manage better than they can. America's successful free market showed everyone that individuals do it better. Elites believe free individuals are not morally and intellectually capable of existing without them in the driver’s seat.

Today’s liberalism evolved from Old World struggles against feudal oppression by church and monarch. It found a home in America, until the free economy of America produced such great wealth. Liberals pitied the living conditions of the poor, even though they were never as bad as in the Old World. They became more community-minded and opposed unshared prosperity. They wanted a new America based just on each person being equal in outcome. Liberals want a generous redistribution of private property and wealth. They refuse to believe poverty is a choice and reject the notion that poverty will always be with us.

Liberals are not for choice. They will destroy the choice individuals have for prosperity through freedom. They believe, as elites, they must design, build and manage all nations of the world. There is no difference from the Old World monarchies and dictatorships. America’s traditions have always been under assault by other nations and some in our own ranks. Now, the entire world is focusing on America. They want to know if liberty can prevail against the assaults. Only time will tell. Only a sufficient rebirth of people’s interests in our traditions, its achievements as well as renewed patriotism can prevent America disappearing from the world. Who then, will stand up for America?
www.ClaysAmerica.com