Sometimes seemingly small and insignificant events contain within them things of much deeper importance. Such is the case with a controversy that has been roiling one of the States of Dixie: la Nouvelle France, Louisiana.
The Louisiana Senate once again appears to be doing its customary dirty work in this legislative session (i.e., protecting the entrenched interests of the powerful and wealthy in our State), by refusing to bring up some of the vehicle insurance reform bills passed by the House for a vote, and modifying others.
Many folks are rightly upset at the senators’ actions, which they decry as a violation of democracy, defined by them as an unquestioning obedience to the will of the voters. If the Senate is standing in the way of good legislation, why not just get rid of it? – that question was the upshot of some of talk radio host Moon Griffon’s commentary of recent days.
We are wading into deeper waters now; critical issues are being touched upon. Let’s begin grappling with them.
First, there is the misunderstanding of democracy. People believe that this system empowers the individual, but, when implemented at the population scales at which it is used here in the US and in many other democracies/republics, it actually disempowers most people. This is because money is needed for the candidates – who are unknown to the greater number of voters in their districts, cities, States, etc. – to advertise, to introduce themselves and their platforms to the voters. Those who provide the candidates with the campaign cash needed to win an election obtain by far the most influence with individual candidates, not the voters. Democratic elections in which there are thousands of voters (or more), as many political observers have pointed out, from G. K. Chesterton to Ron Paul, is merely a mask for oligarchy/plutocracy. Such is the case with the Senate (where the wealthy personal injury lawyers hold a lot of sway) and most other elected offices in Louisiana and elsewhere.
On the other hand, elections in small towns and other little districts where all the voters and candidates know one another, are a different matter entirely. No amount of advertising is able to propagandize about any of the candidates effectively. In the small jurisdictions, it really is the voters who are empowered rather than the oligarchs with their money bags.
Second, the total identification of ‘the people’ with the government is not the definition of freedom but of totalitarianism. Wilhelm Rӧpke makes this point in his book A Humane Economy (ISI Books, Wilmington, Del., 1998, pgs. 67-8). That overly simplified form of government is the kind that was found in France, Russia, and others during their terrible Revolutions. Just governments are naturally complex, just like the society that they reflect and rule over. A good government will therefore have different offices, departments, branches, levels, etc., and will be accountable not simply to the whims of ‘the people’ of the current moment but to higher authorities: God, the Bible, natural law, fidelity to ancestors, and so on. This will sometimes exasperate us, as the different interests represented in the government sometimes frustrate plans that are favored by a majority of the voters, but it is no different than disagreements in a family that must be smoothed over.
This leads to a third point. Time, as one writer whose name eludes us pointed out, is also a critical component of the government. If a desired policy is good and just, support for it amongst the electorate will remain over many election cycles. Eventually, enough officials will be elected to implement it. Patience and endurance are therefore virtues that are needed in societies where elections are used to select most government officials. We cannot dismantle and remake our governments because the issues, legislation, etc., we are supporting doesn’t immediately become law. That, once again, was what the Revolutionaries practiced, to their great harm and disappointment.
This is not to say that the position in which Louisiana’s citizens and those of other countries find ourselves is not rather dire. It is in some respects. Things do need to change in our governments. But the focus needs to be on the right things if beneficial reform is to come about. Foremost amongst them is the Christianization of our politicians. Most of them, as we have said before, are only Christians In Name Only (CINOs). They are, to use the Lord Jesus Christ’s words, hirelings rather than real shepherds who are ready to lay down their lives for the sake of the people they represent (St John’s Gospel 10:11-13): They are just in it for whatever material benefits (i.e., plunder) they can get for themselves and their cronies.
It is perhaps Providential that, as these discussions about our government officials are going on, the Feast Day in the Orthodox Church of St Constantine, a pagan Roman emperor who converted to Christianity, and his mother the Empress Helen was celebrated (21 May; reposed in the 4th century). St Constantine would be a good role model for our officials to emulate, as the hymns in his honor illustrate:
. . .
The rest is at https://www.geopolitika.ru/en/article/insights-theopolitics-episode-new-france.
--
Holy Ælfred the Great, King of England, South Patron, pray for us sinners at the Souð, unworthy though we are!
Anathema to the Union!
