The Real Meaning of the Right to Vote

By Alex Epstein
FrontPageMagazine.com | Tuesday, November 04, 2008

Every Election Day, politicians, intellectuals, and activists propagate a seemingly patriotic but utterly un-American idea: the notion that our most important right--and the source of America’s greatness--is the right to vote. According to former President Bill Clinton, the right to vote is “the most fundamental right of citizenship”; it is “the heart and soul of our democracy,” says Senator John McCain.

Such statements are regarded as uncontroversial--but consider their implications. If voting is truly our most fundamental right, then all other rights--including free speech, property, even life--are contingent on and revocable by the whims of the voting public (or their elected officials). America, on this view, is a society based not on individual rights, but on unlimited majority rule--like ancient Athens, where the populace, exercising “the most fundamental right of citizenship,” elected to kill Socrates for voicing unpopular ideas--or modern-day Zimbabwe, where the democratically elected Robert Mugabe has seized the property of the nation’s white farmers and brought the nation to the verge of starvation--or Germany in 1932, when the people democratically elected the Nazi Party, including future Chancellor Adolph Hitler. Would anyone dare claim that America is thus fundamentally similar to these regimes, and that it is perfectly acceptable to kill controversial philosophers or to exterminate six million Jews, so long as it is done by popular vote?

Contrary to popular rhetoric, America was founded, not as a “democracy,” but as a constitutional republic--a political structure under which the government is bound by a written constitution to the task of protecting individual rights. “Democracy” does not mean a system that holds public elections for government officials; it means a system in which a majority vote rules everything and everyone, and in which the individual thus has no rights. In a democracy, observed James Madison in The Federalist Papers, “there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention [and] have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property.”

The right to vote derives from the recognition of man as an autonomous, rational being, who is responsible for his own life and who should therefore freely choose the people he authorizes to represent him in the government of his country. That autonomy is contradicted if a majority of voters is allowed to do whatever it wishes to the individual citizen. The right to vote is not a sanction for a gang to deprive other individuals of their freedom. Rather, because a free society requires a certain type of government, it is a means of installing the officials who will safeguard the individual rights of each citizen.

What makes America unique is not that it has elections--even dictatorships hold elections--but that its elections take place in a country limited by the absolute principle of individual freedom. From our Declaration of Independence, which upholds the “unalienable rights” of every individual, among which are “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness,” to our Constitution, whose Bill of Rights protects freedom of speech and the freedom of private property, respect for individual liberty is the essence of America--and the root of her greatness.

Unfortunately, with each passing Election Day, too many Americans view elections less as a means to protect freedom, and more as a means to win some government favor or handout at the expense of the liberty and property of other Americans. Our politicians promise, not to protect the basic rights spelled out in the Declaration and the Constitution, but to violate the rights of some people in order to benefit others. Today’s politicians want capital for failing banks--by forcing non-failing Americans to pay for them; subsidies for farmers--by forcing non-farmers to pay for them; prescription drugs for the elderly--by forcing the non-elderly to pay for them; housing for the homeless--by forcing the non-homeless to pay for it. The more “democratic” our government becomes, the more we cannibalize our liberty, ultimately to the detriment of all.

This Election Day, therefore, we should reject those who wish to reduce our republic to mob rule. Instead, we should vote for those, to whatever extent they can be found, who are defenders of the essence of America: individual freedom.

---

Alex Epstein is a writer for the Ayn Rand Institute (ARI) in Irvine, California, which promotes the philosophy of Ayn Rand. Send comments to reaction@aynrand.org.

It has not been a good week for the Republic. It took quite a bit of trampling of the Constitution, but the bailout bill passed, as I suspected it would.

The bailout failed the first time it was brought to the House. Undaunted, the Senate pressed on by attaching the bailout as an amendment to another House-passed bill that was pending in the Senate. The new bailout version had new taxes, so according to the Constitution it should not have originated in the Senate.

The rallying cry heard all over the Hill the past two weeks was that Congress must act. Our economy is facing a meltdown. Would this bill fix it? Nobody could really explain how it would. In fact, few demonstrated any real understanding of credit markets, of derivatives, of credit default swaps or mortgage-backed securities. If they did, they would have known better than to vote for this bill. All they knew was that this administration was saying some frightening things, and asking for a lot of money. And when has Congress ever been able to come up with a better solution to a problem than to throw more of your money at it? So that is what Congress did, enacting a financial PATRIOT Act in the process.

In its embarrassment at being called a "Do-Nothing Congress" the 110th Congress took decisive action and did SOMETHING. No matter that it was the wrong thing. In fact, it wasn't until the Senate had a chance to load it up with even MORE spending, when it was finally inflationary and horrible enough, at $850 billion instead of a mere $700 billion, that it passed – and with a comfortable margin, in spite of constituent calls still coming in overwhelmingly against it. 57 members switched their vote!

The market went down anyway. Our nation is now just that much more in the hole. You will pay your part of this mess through inflation, and very likely hyperinflation.

Sometimes doing nothing is much better than thrashing about aimlessly – when one is caught in quicksand, for example, or when one doesn't understand economics and finds oneself in the position Congress was in for the past two weeks, with decades of irresponsible monetary policy coming to a head. Why should we trust the same people who said just a few months ago that the economy was perfectly sound? The same people who just knew there were weapons of mass destruction? The same people that crammed the PATRIOT Act down our throats? Why not consult the people who had the foresight and understanding to see this coming? They would have recommended such logical actions as repealing the Community Reinvestment Act, which forces banks to make bad loans, or allowing the market to set interest rates instead of the Federal Reserve system. How about abolishing the Federal Reserve altogether? There are many things that could have been done, but don’t expect Congress take a course of action that comes from a place of understanding and competence when they could just spend money.

This bailout will be the legacy of the 110th "Do-Something" Congress, along with record-low approval ratings. Here's hoping the 111th Congress will be a "Do the Right Thing" Congress, and will focus on repealing and abolishing what is wrong with government instead of reinforcing it.

Ron Paul represents the 14th District of Texas.

Hello to everyone from the heart of Prague. I am settled in my flat (as they call them here), getting to know my fellow film classmates. There are three of us American students in each flat and one Czech student who also attends the film school, FAMU. They are all older and taking courses in what seems to be a masters program.

For the past few days, they have been showing us American students around the city with little assignments to remind us that we are in fact STUDYING abroad but I could care less because, lets get real, its Prague! We visited Vyshrad, a beautiful setting with an old castle, a small park to walk around and a huge hill that I practically keeled over and died while climbing. After that we trekked along to Wenceslas square which is the area that contains the infamous astronomical clock. I was surprised to see that it wasn’t as large or tall as I had imagined in the photos I’d seen. More castles were to be seen in our walk to Wenceslas square at night which was an incredible sight because of all the city lights. Let me pause to say that for the past few days, we have been walking all over, which I don’t mind but my feet and ankles are screaming at me because Prague is covered with cobble stone which are not for the flat footed or faint hearted.

So moving on, besides the sightseeing which I could bore you with details that would not do them justice, we have been eating out at authentic Czech restaurants which I can tell you is not good for your stomach, especially to those who are used to eating rice, kimchi and chicken. The Czechs like their food heavy, hearty and fattening which I love but not for two days straight. I think the eating out is just for our introduction to Czech cuisine but from now on we’ll be cooking our own light, healthy meals (which the Czechs do most of the week; they don’t eat this artery clogging food every day). Another thing that I noticed is that the beverage of choice at most meals is, can anyone guess? Yes, beer. Beer galore. Dark beers, light beers, beers in big mugs, beers in slim glasses, beers of all shapes and sizes and colors and tastes. I don’t think I’ll be able to go back to Bud Light when I return home. It’s a wonder that not all Czechs don’t have the American beer belly but then again, the ones I see are in the city and walk every where, so they get their fair share of exercise.

Our Czech flat buddies, as we call them (there are four of them in the four flats), have been slowly trying to nudge the Czech language in to our heads and that is no easy feat. The sound of the words is strange because they put together sounds that are not put together in English.

Regarding pictures, internet is hard to come by here as of now but supposedly we will be getting internet in our flats so if that happens then i will be able to put up pictures more often but now we have to pay for internet so i'll be holding off on that at the moment.

So Na shledano for now (good bye) but I will try to write as often as I can. Hope everyone is doing well in the States.

xoxox Jennifer

Yesterday, the Politico quoted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as saying, "I'm
trying to save the planet; I'm trying to save the planet." She was
responding, of course, to pressure that she and her fellow Democrats are
experiencing to suspend a congressional ban on offshore oil drilling in the
face of skyrocketing energy prices. It would be really wonderful, however,
if the liberal congresswoman could get as energized about saving our once
great republic.

Herein lies another problem: the vast majority of our politicos (from both
major parties) do not even seem to know what kind of country the United
States was designed to be. Virtually every reference made to the United
States by our civil magistrates is that we are a "democracy." That's odd;
someone should have told our Founding Fathers, because they emphatically
rejected the concept of creating a "democracy" in favor of creating a
constitutional republic.

Has anyone quoted the Pledge of Allegiance lately? Does it say, "And to the
democracy for which it stands"? Or does it say, "And to the republic for
which it stands"? Of course it says "republic."

At the conclusion of the Constitutional Convention, a passerby asked
Benjamin Franklin, "Well, Doctor, what have we got--a republic or monarchy?"
Franklin replied, "A republic--if you can keep it."

Ladies and Gentlemen, that is the sixty-four million dollar question: Can we
keep our republic? Can we keep our constitutional form of government? Can we
keep our constitutionally protected liberties?

In Federalist No. 10, James Madison ("The Father of the U.S. Constitution")
said, "[D]emocracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention;
have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of
property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been
violent in their deaths."

The fear of what happens to freedom and liberty under democratic rule is
what prompted Madison and the rest of America's founders to labor so hard to
create what they did: a constitutional republic.

Under God, it is allegiance to the Constitution that has preserved our
liberties, our peace and happiness, our security, and our very way of life.
Furthermore, it is the repudiation and rejection of constitutional
government that is responsible for the manner in which these very same
blessings are currently being lost.

Someone needs to remind Rep. Pelosi that it is not her duty (nor does she
have the power) to "save the planet." And by the same token, someone needs
to remind Senators Barack Obama and John McCain that they are not
campaigning to be President of the World, but President of the United
States.

What every elected officeholder is expected and required to do is very
simple: they are required to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution
of the United States of America. Period. End of story.

Our public servants are not charged with saving the snail darter or the
Spotted Owl, or saving the profits of the international bankers, or saving
Wall Street in general, or saving the perks of corporate lobbyists, or
saving Freddie and Fannie, or saving the peoples of the world from all the
bogeymen, or even saving humankind or the planet itself. What our public
servants are charged with, however, is preserving (saving) our
constitutional republic.

Of course, the problem is, the people who are charged with the preservation
of our republic are the ones who are the most responsible for its
destruction. The American people have far more to fear from Nancy Pelosi,
Barack Obama, and John McCain than they do from any foreign adversary,
because our leaders have proven that they have absolutely no fidelity to the
principles of constitutional government. They have no compunction about
eviscerating the protection of our freedoms, or about abolishing the
vanguard of our liberties. They are Machiavellian, making King George of old
look like a mere amateur.

No, I take that back. It is not our civil magistrates who are most
responsible for the destruction of our republican form of government: it is
"We the people."

At the end of the day, it is the responsibility of the people to govern
themselves. We must be willing to hold our civil magistrates accountable to
the contract they made with us, which is to uphold constitutional
government. It is our duty to "throw off" any system of government that does
not secure our liberties and protect our constitution. And this we have not
done.

Christian pastors and ministers have failed us. The "Religious Right" has
failed us. College professors have failed us. High School teachers have
failed us. Newspaper editors and publishers have failed us. TV news anchors
and reporters have failed us. Parents have failed. Friends have failed. The
two major political parties have failed. As a whole, no one is talking
about, or even thinking about, the loss of constitutional government,
national independence, and sovereignty. Few seem even conscious that this is
taking place.

Worrying about which major party wins a general election is like worrying
about whether Coke or Pepsi sold more soft drinks last month. Pick your
poison. One is just as bad as the other. Neither has any fidelity to the
Constitution or to the principles of liberty, which it represents. Both John
McCain and Barack Obama are enemies to constitutional government. Both are
in the process of sacrificing our national sovereignty to global entities.
Both men lied when they took an oath to preserve and protect the
Constitution. So, why should we care which impostor wins the election?

It is up to the American people to enforce constitutional government. From a
Christian perspective, it is "We the people" who are the "powers that be" in
Romans chapter 13. Under our form of government, the source of authority and
the source of legitimacy reside with "We the people." We are not the slaves
of any king or despot. Our elected leaders are public servants, not private
masters. In a nutshell, they work for us. They are contracted to preserve
our liberties and our way of life. When they fail, they must answer to us.

So, when will the American people pick themselves up by the bootstraps and
start acting like free citizens and stop groveling before these imbecilic
political parties? When will we set this political house in order?

Of course, all of this demands that each of us understands constitutional
government and the principles upon which liberty rests. It also demands that
each of us be prepared to do whatever is our personal duty to preserve this
republic.

Patriotism is more than waving a flag on July 4th, or singing The National
Anthem at a ball game, or wearing a flag lapel pin on Flag Day. For an
American, real patriotism means that we are willing to preserve and protect
our constitutional republic. Remember, Franklin's answer: "A republic--if
you can keep it."

Nancy Pelosi can talk about saving the planet all she wants to: her duty,
however, is to preserve, protect, and defend the U.S. Constitution. And that
is also the job of every single American citizen. Unfortunately, most of us
are no better at doing our job than Pelosi is at doing hers.

www.chuckbaldwinlive.com