As difficult as it is to accept, I take it to heart. Please join me.
https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Ezekiel-Chapter-33/
It doesn’t mean I’ve gone all kumbaya, either; there is a lot left to the story I want to share.
All posts by jr.ohmage@proton.me
Sunday morning review
on Monday… Tuesday… Wednesday…Thursday
I came across a couple of stories about doctors being persecuted for their science based concern for their patients that I thought required some context.
What started this surge of interest was a link to a story about a Florida doctor at https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/florida-doctor-reinstated-after-losing-board-certification-for-criticizing-covid-19-vaccines-5480957. I didn’t read the epoch times account because I usually don’t want to give up my email address just to read a story I can find elsewhere.
Guess what. The only other place that made mention of that story (and using the epoch times as their reference) was https://ground.news/article/florida-doctor-reinstated-after-losing-board-certification-for-criticizing-covid-19-vaccines and they included this warning:
Read with caution – this story is only being covered by one news source that has a ‘low factuality’ rating, which means the outlet has a history of poor reporting practices. Learn more about factuality ratings here.
Factuality ratings? I got yer factuality ratings right here; and they want us to believe we live free? We live in a democracy is where we live and democracies aren’t free. Our Republic was but we, without being notified, were shifted into a slave state democracy and until that’s recognized we’re doomed; and recognition won’t happen until the blinders are removed from peoples eyes and Jesus is the only one who can remove them. The thing is, you have to seriously ask him to do that and it appears most folks are quite comfortable wearing those blinders.
Another story was weaved into the search returns; it’s about a Dr.Sherri Tenpenny, DO. You’re likely familiar with her predicament
https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/features/105864 After reading the account of the Ohio medical establishments regimented attack on the 1st Amendment protection afforded all Americans I read through the comments where I was shocked by the ignorance freely admitted by the commenters, some openly displaying their connections to ‘science’.
Which only provided me the entre to shed some light on that which we are allegedly soon to be forbidden to do… ask questions. Oh no, the scientists cry…another conspiracy theory!
OK, I’ll interrupt the covid story with this recent news that changes the conspiracy theory concept to straight up conspiracy:
https://www.un.org/pga/77/2023/08/28/letter-from-the-president-of-the-general-assembly-high-level-meeting-on-pandemic-prevention-preparedness-and-response-co-facilitators-letter-political-declaration-silence-procedure/ which, UNless you are a UN lackey you will understand little of and misunderstand everything else.
That’s why I’m including what they’re gobbledy-gooking about at https://www.un.org/pga/77/wp-content/uploads/sites/105/2023/06/Zero-draft-PPPR-Political-Declaration-5-June.pdf page 4, PP23; page 9 GLOBAL GOVERNANCE; page 10, OP27. Encourage fair, equitable and timely sharing of benefits of pathogens with pandemic potential..
WhateverTF that means, it ain’t civilized.
If you haven’t yet recognized they are acting like the U.S. no longer exists, you won’t be able to deny it after you read their Political Declaration, their wannabe new book of rules our traitors will be pushing in a couple of weeks.
But right now, it’s back to the ‘scientists’ commenting on MedpageToday cracking wise like sixth grade nerds.
Whether they were in the sixth grade or not, they all found it ridiculous that magnets could pass through a needle (guffaw). I was looking for a real scientist to point out the fact that magnetized graphene could easily pass through a needle.
Alas, alack; it didn’t happen even though it had been known for eight years when the wisecrackin’ commentators were mocking the facts.
There was a more recent announcement about graphene’s magnetic ability…
In 2022 Brown university put a spin on the magic angle they discovered that transformed graphene into a powerful ferromagnet
PROVIDENCE, R.I. [Brown University] — When two sheets of the carbon nanomaterial graphene are stacked together at a particular angle with respect to each other, it gives rise to some fascinating physics. For instance, when this so-called “magic-angle graphene” is cooled to near absolute zero, it suddenly becomes a superconductor, meaning it conducts electricity with zero resistance.
Hmm. Wasn’t keeping the ‘vaccine’ frozen an issue back in the early days of vaxx when people were sticking spoons to their arms? Still wondering.
But Brown was not breaking new ground in 2022.
In 2015 https://www.sciencenews.org/article/graphenes-allure-becomes-magnetic published the magnetic angle five days after this paper was published.
While the 9/27/20 patent application for Nano Coronavirus Recombinant Vaccine Taking Graphene Oxide As Carrier did not mention the magnetized capabilities of graphene.(about a third of the way down… under the Disclosure of Invention heading) it did list the patents intent:
The invention aims to provide a coronavirus recombinant vaccine.
Another purpose of the invention is to provide a preparation method of the virus recombinant vaccine.
It is still another object of the present invention to provide the use of the recombinant vaccine of the virus.
So that the reader understands the nature and meaning of the word recombinant, according to https://www.britannica.com/science/recombinant-DNA-technology it is:
recombinant DNA, molecules of DNA from two different species that are inserted into a host organism to produce new genetic combinations that are of value to science, medicine, agriculture, and industry. Since the focus of all genetics is the gene, the fundamental goal of laboratory geneticists is to isolate, characterize, and manipulate genes.
Did you notice that humanity is not on the list of WHO gains the value of the new genetic combinations of recombinant DNA? Take that seriously because that is the basis of these modern replies that remove the technocrats from liability…
Please do not take britannica’s definition as the only one. Look it up yourself. There are many ways to say the same thing but I’ll bet most of you never heard that one on the evening news. I know I didn’t. It sounds too much like the original arguments against the mRNA vaccines, doesn’t it? Mustn’t have that.
One more suggestion. I’d start at the conclusion of that frontiersin site; and count the number of ‘mays’ used. It could make a person question the meaning of settled science.
Moving on.
While it is extremely unlikely that neither Shanghai National Engineering Research Center for Nanotechnology Co Ltd., the applicant for the patent, nor https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer_announces_partnership_with_shanghai_institutes_for_biological_sciences_for_drug_discovery_activities their acknowledged partner, were UNaware of the graphene’s magnetic ability discovered five years prior to the patent application, no mention of it’s magnetic abilities were mentioned in that application.
Meanwhile, in the matter of graphene misinformation, Pfizer answers the question…
Is there graphene oxide in the COVID-19 vaccine?
No. Graphene oxide is not an ingredient in the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. In a document submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) titled “Structural and Biophysical Characterization of SARS-CoV-2 Spike Glycoprotein (P2 S) as a Vaccine Antigen,” Pfizer indicated the use of graphene oxide during development phases to help determine the structure of the COVID-19 vaccine. However, graphene oxide it is not listed as nor has it been used as an ingredient in the vaccine itself.
Now, this is where misinformation, which our controllers use better than those of us trying to get to the truth of the matter, this is where the controller’s version of information, gets a little confusing. Currently, we are supposed to accept what all authority says as truthful despite the messages their actions and their history tell us.
Messages like this:
The first Covid19 diagnostic test was developed back in January 2020 reported that: “no quantified virus isolates are currently available.”
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31992387/
Abstract
Background: The ongoing outbreak of the recently emerged novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV) poses a challenge for public health laboratories as virus isolates are unavailable while there is growing evidence that the outbreak is more widespread than initially thought, and international spread through travelers does already occur.
Aim: We aimed to develop and deploy robust diagnostic methodology for use in public health laboratory settings without having virus material available.
Methods: Here we present a validated diagnostic workflow for 2019-nCoV, its design relying on close genetic relatedness of 2019-nCoV with SARS coronavirus, making use of synthetic nucleic acid technology.
Do you remember when close only counted in horseshoes and hand grenades?
The FDA Performance Analysis from July 2020 further documents “No Virus Isolate Available” on p.40 https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download
The analytical sensitivity of the rRT-PCR assays contained in the CDC 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel were determined in Limit of Detection studies. Since no quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV are currently available, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of known titer (RNA copies/µL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen….“
Examples of other grey areas:
https://usrtk.org/covid-19-origins/fauci-nih-wuhan-coronaviruses/?mc_cid=a1586e2846
https://patents.google.com/patent/CN112220919A/en
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9283760/ Everything and I mean everything about medical patents and GO was not specifically mentioned AFAICS
https://nercn.lookchem.com/About.html Shanghai National Engineering Research Center for Nanotechnology Co., Ltd.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7521125/ in 2016 China and U.S. were goombah deep
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWI0YiSmTKs MSNBC Brian Williams looks at covid conspiracy theories
Here’s four examples of a rather large chunk of confusing misinformation from https://academic.oup.com/nsr/article/9/10/nwac124/6618601? from Oxford University Press Copyright © 2023 China Science Publishing & Media Ltd. (Science Press)
NANOTECHNOLOGY FOR DETECTION OF SARS-COV-2
1)…Within weeks after the first published report of COVID-19, the full sequence of the SARS-CoV-2 genome had been determined, and it was shared globally, informing the development of vaccines and medicines…
Reply:
From https://www.fda.gov/media/134922/download pg 41
The analytical sensitivity of the rRT-PCR assays contained in the CDC 2019 Novel Coronavirus (2019-
nCoV) Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel were determined in Limit of Detection studies. Since no
quantified virus isolates of the 2019-nCoV were available for CDC use at the time the test was developed
and this study conducted, assays designed for detection of the 2019-nCoV RNA were tested with
characterized stocks of in vitro transcribed full length RNA (N gene; GenBank accession: MN908947.2) of
known titer (RNA copies/µL) spiked into a diluent consisting of a suspension of human A549 cells and
viral transport medium (VTM) to mimic clinical specimen. Samples were extracted using the QIAGEN EZ1
Advanced XL instrument and EZ1 DSP Virus Kit (Cat# 62724) and manually with the QIAGEN DSP Viral
RNA Mini Kit (Cat# 61904). Real-Time RT-PCR assays were performed using the Thermo Fisher Scientific
TaqPath™ 1-Step RT-qPCR Master Mix, CG (Cat# A15299) on the Applied Biosystems™ 7500 Fast Dx RealTime PCR Instrument according to the CDC 2019-nCoV Real-Time RT-PCR Diagnostic Panel instructions for use.
Nanoparticle-based techniques for detection of SARS-CoV-2
2)…A range of nanoparticles, including colloidal gold nanoparticles, quantum dots (QDs), rare earth nanoparticles, magnetic nanoparticles, carbon nanotubes and hybrid nanoparticles such as QD-doped mesoporous silica nanoparticles, can be used in immunoassays to detect various targets (Fig. 1a) [10,11]. The tests can be used with nasal swabs, throat swabs, sputum samples, saliva samples or serum. There are 49 US FDA-approved antigen diagnostic devices for COVID-19, as of 28 May 2022, under emergency-use authorizations. Most of these diagnostic devices are LFA that use colloidal gold nanoparticles or QDs…
Reply
Was the early presentation of the graphene-causes-metal-to-stick-to-my-body argument made to position the strong denial of graphene being mixed in the vaccine as the blanket acceptance that would shut down questions of possible graphene applications elsewhere, allowing the use of graphene to be sheltered in the don’t ask don’t tell zone while it is being used on the trusting guileless being tested?
NANOTECHNOLOGY AND COVID-19 VACCINES
3)… nanoparticles can also be used as adjuvants, to boost the overall efficiency of the immune response generated by vaccines. Adjuvants also reduce the required antigen dose [39]. Of the various COVID-19 vaccines in development, 10 candidate vaccines have used protein subunits in combination with a nanoparticle adjuvant (6 at preclinical and 4 at clinical testing stage)…
Reply
The grey area we’re supposed to take the controllers word on looks to have gotten somewhat darker in the vagueness of those few sentences. Are we supposed to look forward to graphene adjuvants or are they being used already?
Nanomaterials with direct anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity
4)Although SARS-CoV-2 can be transmitted readily by droplets and aerosols, contact transmission is an important additional route, via contaminated inanimate surfaces and poor hand hygiene [50].The virus SARS-CoV-2 remains active on a range of surfaces, including glass, metal, wood and plastic, for up to several days [51]. As a result, there is interest in using antiviral nanomaterials [52,53] and nanoparticles that can carry antiviral agents [54]. Antiviral activity against SARS-CoV-2 has been shown for a number of nanoparticles, including silver [55], zinc oxide [56], cuprous oxide [57], silica, gold [58] and graphene oxide grafted with metal nanoparticles [59]. When used to coat personal protective equipment, the combination of graphene oxide with silver, iron, zinc and copper nanoparticles improves antiviral activity against both enveloped and non-enveloped viruses [59].
Reply
That sounds more like a warning intended to condition their subjects into an acceptance of a treatment for a virus(?) that has no natural isolate.
…So far, 10 vaccines have been granted emergency use listing (EUL) by the WHO (16 May 2022).
WHO didn’t give US orders when we were a Republic. We should remember that… and never forget this…
Camel meet straw
https://sashalatypova.substack.com/p/highland-hospital-rochester-ny-attempted
Lab Experiments Gone Wild
Here’s an interesting video. Excitement picks up about the 6 minute mark and lasts until the end.
The six second mark in the following video reminded me of the action that starts at six minute mark in the above show
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KzWvAVk-jEg
Many people aren’t aware of the role FERC plays in controlling vegetation around transmission lines. (defined in first three minutes)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cqRcCgGex-g
Full Committee Markup of 20 Pieces of Legislation (3.9.23)
Control In Jeopardy… UNfriendlies In The Wire
https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/Annual-Report-1942-1.pdf pg 20
A FAITH WORTH FIGHTING FOR
The fate of democracy, whatever it may be, is also the fate of our institutions of learning. While these institutions in earlier years helped to release the intellectual ferment out of which our modern democracy developed, they are today based upon the intellectual and spiritual foundations which democracy itself has laid. They can exist only so long as democracy exists* Regimented ideas and universities cannot live side by side. A university in exile is an indictment of a civilization. The search for truth and the weighing of values cannot be maintained in a world from which freedom has been banished…
When a progressive, even a long dead progressive, in this case, Raymond Fosdick, refers to our republic as a democracy, it has to be challenged.
Distinguishing between a Democracy and a Republic. The United States is not a democracy, and the Founders used strong words to make clear that their nation should never become one.
Consider the following statements:
Benjamin Rush: “A simple democracy … is one of the greatest of evils” (1789).
James Madison: “Democracies 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” (1787).
John Adams: “Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide” (1814).
Thomas Jefferson: “An elective despotism was not the government we fought for…” (1782)
Edmund Randolph: “…that in tracing these evils to their origin every man had found it in the turbulence and follies of democracy.” (1787)
John Marshall: “Between a balanced republic and a democracy, the difference is like that between order and chaos.” The simple fact is that the United States is a republic (and a constitutional republic at that), not a democracy, by purposeful design
Meanwhile, let’s ask our own question; if a university in exile is an indictment of civilization, how broad is the indictment when our God and our Constitution are nudged into exile? When the supporting framework of our belief in both God and Country, our churches and our Constitution are being diminished into skeletal fabrications by political edicts designed to reshape society at the same time it denies all evidence it is leading US to perdition and denouncing any criticism of their crimes?
Now about those churches…501c3 is not forced on them. Yeah, but
https://www.churchlawcenter.com/church-law/political-activities-by-churches-whats-permitted-and-whats-prohibited/ says there are prohibited political activities. I’ll guess abortion was probably the first one they had to ignore.
One has to wonder why a church lawyer would tell churches they are prohibited from participating in some political activities when the IRS writes on the first line…
Every organization exempt from federal income tax under Internal Revenue Code section 501(a) must file an annual information return except:
1. A church, an interchurch organization of local units of a church, a convention or association of churches.
To be perfectly clear:
https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/churches-integrated-auxiliaries-and-conventions-or-associations-of-churches
Executive orders are directions to employees of the executive branch, and are not binding on anyone else. They must be in accordance with the Constitution and laws of the United States, and anyone who believes themselves to be injured by an executive order can sue in federal court and ask that the order be overturned.
There have been many times that federal courts have overturned executive orders of Presidents of both major parties.
If an executive order does not violate current law, but Congress doesn’t like it, they can pass a bill overturning such an executive order. However, if the President vetoes the bill, the veto can be overridden only by a vote of 2/3 of each house of Congress
Why DEW They DEW What They DEW?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CiykXLEW2NU
That Dr. Strangelove type opening is included for perchance one or two of the millions of survivors of the vaxx, who willingly succumbed to that world-wide fear based misdirection play, encounter this post, or a similar version of this post and remember it as a reminder to look before they leap again; to think about who is directing you and even to consider what they have done in the past for you, before you put your life on the line, again.
You should remember to compare what was done for you to what was done to you in the past.
Even during ongoing attempts to clarify the conflicting information about 5g don’t you think such efforts would be in the range of political duties? To provide citizens, their constituents, with an understandable explanation of frequency bands and their usage? Do you recall ever receiving any information about that from your local Congressional representative even as they drew up laws to govern the usage of such?
In fact, all you have to to do is consider how often your political representatives have kept you up to date on the government’s ability to modify weather and their planned use of directed energy.
Have you ever gotten an election message from him/her/them/whatever that explained their position on Directed Energy that included anything of substance?
Such as how far the globalist controllers are willing to go to sell climate change by having US sacrifice our health and comfort before they acknowledge they have the ability to control weather and fire?
This document was authored by the Office of the U.S. Air Force’s Chief Scientist for Directed Energy, Air Force Research Laboratory, for the Office of the U.S. Secretary of Defense’s Directed Energy Community of Interest. We are grateful for contributions from the U.S. Naval Research Lab, Office of Naval Research, U.S. Army Space and Missile Defense Command, Joint Intermediate Force Capabilities Office, other components of the Department of Defense, Los Alamos, Sandia and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories, collaborators from industry, academia, and international partners affiliated with the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. Public Affairs release approval # AFRL-2021-1152
Chapter two has very interesting topics. From there we learn…
…Although DE is most certainly not a cure-all, there are other technologies on the horizon that make use of the power of light in perhaps surprising ways. For example quantum-information can be encoded on pulses of laser light, enabling higher security communications. In another example, there are projects underway in the U.S. (U.S.A.F. 2019, Mosher 2018) and in China (Rosenbaum 2019) that use DE to transport or “beam” power to remote and disadvantages locations…
At range DE can be used to destroy or degrade material through absorption, which includes effects such as damaging sensors or the human eye, an offensive technique used by non-state actors today in operations, such as intermediate force actions that deny people access to point locations (see Sec. 2.4). Laser weapons can also cause damage by igniting fires.
All together Directed Energy Weapons cause all 5 of the well-known “D’s”— destroy, damage, degrade, deny, and deception — in addition to other strategic effects identified in the U.S. Joint Chiefs’ of Staff DoD Dictionary. In the rest of this section we will focus on the blunt effects of physical damage and destruction as a means to project military power at range.
The power of DE to burn holes in material by heating it to temperatures at which it melts or otherwise structurally breaks, is a power that is
uniquely suited for lasers. For a few every day examples of high energy lasers that melt metal, consider welders and laser etchers. Both high-energy laser devices are common place equipment in industrial applications today. These laser devices are proliferated around the world. Lasers have found use in these applications because the physics of heating a hard material, such as metal to its melting point favors frequencies at which the material most effectively absorbs light. Those frequencies are typically in theUV, optical, and infrared parts of the spectrum, all of which, are suited to laser production. Laser light can be focused very tightly as well, literally focusing destructive energy on a potential target. And it has other unique characteristics, such as potential long-range characteristics that we will explain further throughout this document…
2.2. Directed Energy Scalability and Flexibility in Application of
Power within Phases of Conflict
In addition to destructive effects described in Sec. 2.1, DE provides options for what many refer to as dialable or scalable effects. Associated with dialable effects is flexibility in application of power across the leading phases of conflict, from shaping of the battlespace, deterring aggression, and domination of the electromagnetic spectrum (U.S. Joint Chiefs’ of Staff 2018). DEWs provide these options by causing effects in militarily relevant scenarios. Low levels of laser light, millimeter waves, microwaves, radio frequencies, and particle beams can all be absorbed in materials through processes fundamentally
different from hole burning described in Sec. 2.1, but with known and potentially devastating effects.
These effects include:
• Causing destructive fires (even children know that one can fry an ant with a
magnifying glass.)
• Counter informational and specifically, counter ISR missions such as jamming , dazzling,
infrared and radar counter measures that degrade, disrupt, and deceive sensors and
electronic systems that are highly susceptible to specific frequencies of light
• Denial by non-lethal repelling, long-distance hailing, and ground base defense missions
(Office 2020)
Which leaves a thinking American pondering this: Why aren’t a couple of DEWs down on the border?
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/article-4/section-4/
Meanwhile, the U.S. is by far the biggest user of Directed Energy, but is not the only player.https://www.mordorintelligence.com/industry-reports/global-military-laser-systems-market-industry, an Indian based company, lists the top ten DE players. If you scroll down that page you’ll see on the map that Australia also has the ability to play with Quantum Fire. It’s all so very interesting.
Disclaimer
The views expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defence, the Royal Australian Air Force, or the Government of Australia. This document is approved for public release; distribution unlimited. Portions of this document may be quoted or reproduced without permission, provided a standard source credit is included.
This document was written for use as an academic text to promote the thinking and discussion on the philosophies and concepts for the Australian employment of air power, in a public domain. The works of APDC are produced for academic purposes and are not intended to be used as technical analyses of foreign military systems. APDC uses information sources and products that are available in the public domain as open sources.
About the Air Power Development Centre
The Air Power Development Centre (APDC) was established by the Royal Australian Air Force in 1989. The APDC provides practical and effective
analysis and advice on the strategic development of air and space power to the Chief of Air Force, the Royal Australian Air Force, and its partners.
The APDC mission is to support strategic decision-making about the future of air and space power for Air Force and its partners.
Air and space power is a cornerstone of Australia’s security, and Australia’s unique strategic geography means that will always be so. As the principal provider of Australia’s air and space power, the RAAF is tasked with the conduct of air and space operations in pursuit of the nation’s security and defence. As exponents of air and space power, all members of the RAAF have an inherent responsibility to be knowledgeable regarding the theory and doctrine of air and space power.
How long will you be content with the role of global village idiot, a servant of the Progressive’s progress?
Speaking of Sanctuary Sissies
https://www.bostonherald.com/2023/07/12/howie-carr-lucky-24-towns-get-migrants-guess-who-doesnt/
The Healey administration has released a list of the 28 cities and towns where it is spending millions on hotels and motels for thousands of handout-demanding illegals arriving from the Third World.
Oddly, however, almost all the ultra-affluent suburban communities most loudly committed to celebrating diversity have thus far been unable to provide suitable free housing for the new non-working classes.
The illegals are not being sent to, among other millionaire destinations, Cambridge, Brookline, Newton, Martha’s Vineyard, Nantucket, Chatham, Swampscott, Newburyport, Wellesley, Dover, Sherborn, Amherst….
Do you begin to get the picture?
These melanin-impaired preserves of the Beautiful People all have Hate Has No Home Here signs festooned on every lawn. Yet oddly they somehow remain unaffected by the Democrats’ ongoing “fundamental transformation” of America into a Third World flophouse.
Another UNConstitutional action against the American People…
Section 4 Republican Form of Government
The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.
…by another Progressive
https://www.bostonherald.com/2022/02/03/maura-healey-dont-call-me-a-moderate/
Maura Healey is pushing back on attempts to label her a “moderate,” saying instead that she’s a “proud progressive” in the running to be the next governor.
“I am a proud progressive and I am incredibly proud of my record,” said Healey, speaking on WBUR’s “Radio Boston” on Thursday. “I was the one that challenged and successfully defeated the Defense of Marriage Act. I brought cases against big banks — first of its kind civil rights claims for their discriminatory practices back in the day of the mortgage meltdown in 2008.”
“I’m very, very proud of my progressive record,” Healey continued…
Healey underscored her record as attorney general, going after Purdue Pharma and the Sackler family for their role in perpetuating the opioid epidemic, Exxon Mobil and the National Rifle Association. She said she would take that experience working for people “who needed protection” into the role as governor.
“I see this tremendous opportunity to grow and build in ways that we have not yet even imagined. We have incredible potential here in this state,” Healey said.
Progressives…living up to their promises in ways that leave sane people in shock.
If waking up one morning and finding you’re living in a third world crap hole at the whim and direction of a progressive politician (and this Howie Carr piece shows how easily that can happen ) is not something you’d like to see from your kitchen window, ya’ll better start paying attention to what’s going on under Democrat cover and Republican support.
Some Progs start slow with decriminalizing what they consider minor infractions. What they are doing is loosening foundational structures of civilized society. Lately, their second term activity turns into a progressive chit storm that ends up affecting surrounding areas like this report from the Philadelphia suburbs https://broadandliberty.com/2023/08/08/bensalem-police-director-speaks-out-on-city-crime-reaching-suburbs/ and for whatever reason, budgetary concerns, progressive judges, wildfires or hot, hot, hot Hollywood gossip, or the weather, the screw tightening is forgotten but the Chainge, will roll on, no citizen help required. Our control is being taken from us.
Them progressives are some smooth operators.
Maybe He Just Realized
his dance card was empty and all his future appearances will be in the newspaper’s comic section.
https://broadandliberty.com/2023/08/02/tom-stiglich-kenney-historically-bad/
It’s not like we didn’t warn him https://youtu.be/Y-In-PqrChY
and it’s not like he didn’t insist on being wrong
His nature, his history; Ya know?
https://www.bucksafa11.org/2023/01/03/same-attitude-different-hearts/
Michigan Wax
The recent Gateway Pundit story about the Michigan Attorney General reaching deep into the long abandoned molehill of political integrity to invert it into a mountain of righteous progressive outrage itself appears as if GP is looking to work it’s own molehill magic.
It’s been quite some time now that Michigan voting machines reputation was of them being of the free ranging variety. You probably remember Harri Hursti? …bought about 200 used voting machines without incident, but the one he purchased on eBay last month is now the subject of a state investigation, with Michigan officials determined to find out how the device ended up for sale online? Here’s the rest of the story…
BTW, NPR never says that Hursti purchased 200 Michigan voting machines but they didn’t say they weren’t all from Michigan, either. That’s the first thing a person has to remember when reading or listening to progressives; what they don’t say is often where the truth of the matter lies.
…The U.S. Election Assistance Commission says voting machines should be meticulously inventoried and kept under lock and key “in a tamper-proof location, preferably within the election office.”
Even the State’s star witness finagled a bunch of them out of their ‘tamper-proof location’ as he proudly related back in 2018
http://web.archive.org/web/20180426080405/https://news.engin.umich.edu/2018/04/mock-election/
‘I hacked an election. So can the Russians.’
(I apologize for the interruption but…the Russians again? The (progressives really ought to move on from Hillary’s Russia, Russia, Russia anger, ya know? Yeah, it was said when the wounds were still raw but didn’t they drag out the lies about Russia the entire time they weren’t in control? Maybe now they’re worried about losing it again.JR)
by Nicole Casal Moore
April 9, 2018
Professor Alex Halderman and the New York Times staged a mock election to demonstrate voting machine vulnerability. | Short Read
A row of voting machines purchased on eBay lined Tishman Hall one winter morning. These were archetypes of the very same equipment used today in many states—Georgia, and parts of Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Florida and Pennsylvania.
Students cast ballots for the “greatest university”—the University of Michigan or Ohio State.
Unbeknownst to the voters, the machines had been hacked by a likely culprit: J. Alex Halderman, professor of computer science and engineering who routinely uses hacking to demonstrate how vulnerable electronic voting actually is. He has turned a voting machine into a PacMan game and famously hacked a mock election in DC several years ago, changing votes to famous robots.
Halderman worked with the New York Times editorial department to produce the video: I hacked an election. So can the Russians. In it, he explains how he did it.
“After the chaos of the 2000 election, we were promised a modern and dependable way to vote,” Halderman says in the video. “I’m here to tell you that the electronic voting machines Americans got to solve the problem of voting integrity, they turned out to be an awful idea. That’s because people like me can hack them all too easily.
“Our highly computerized election infrastructure is vulnerable to sabotage and even to cyberattacks that could change votes.”
Halderman has testified before Congress on the issue. He says that while it’s promising that the Senate Intelligence Committee has recently shown some understanding of the problem, states must act too.
advocates for back-up paper ballots that could make true audits possible. It’s a system that President Trump also supports.
“In a real election an official could quickly scan these paper ballots and shortly after have a human verify the results,” Halderman says in the video.
The State’s witness, Halderman, did make a list of suggestions mysteriously similar to The U.S. Election Assistance Commission’s
One might think with all the patronage jobs available that politicians would already have a reliable somebody to hold the keys to the electoral vault able to explain the rules they (the politicians) need to know and enforce.
Analysis of the Antrim County, Michigan November 2020 Election Incident
On the basis of my investigation, I offer the following recommendations to improve the administration of future elections:
1. Michigan and other states should expand the use of risk-limiting audits (RLAs) so that they occur in all major contests. RLAs provide a last line of defense against error and fraud and provide an added basis for voter confidence
2. The Bureau of Elections should require counties to perform end-to-end preelection testing, in which memory cards from L&A testing are loaded into the EMS and the results report is check for accuracy. Such testing would have detected the mismatched election definitions in Antrim County.
3. The Bureau of Elections should revise L&A testing procedures to ensure that testing is repeated after any change to election definitions or ballot designs.
4. The Bureau of Elections should revise county canvassing procedures and training to ensure that reported results in all contests are accurately compared to the results on scanner poll tapes and any discrepancies fully explained.
5. States that do not require canvassers to compare results to poll tapes, as Michigan does, should introduce this form of validation, which provides an important safeguard against reporting errors.
6. The Bureau of Elections should revise procedures and training to clarify what steps must be taken if absentee voters return ballots that use outdated designs.
7. The Bureau of Elections should revise training materials to include discussion of lessons from the Antrim County incident, including the importance of reviewing results for obvious errors or omissions before making them public.
8. Antrim County should provide additional training for county and township staff concerning the correct operation of the Dominion voting system, including proper procedures for operating the EMS and polling place equipment.
9. Dominion should revise its documentation to more prominently warn that mismatched election definitions could lead to erroneous results.
10. Other voting system vendors should review their equipment to determine whether reporting errors could potentially occur under similar circumstances.
11. Dominion should enhance D-Suite to verify that the election definition on a memory card being loaded is compatible with the one used by the EMS.
12. Dominion should revise documentation and training to emphasize that routine EMS tasks should not be performed from privileged user accounts.
13. Dominion should ensure that customers receive and are instructed to apply all appropriate security updates affecting EMS software components.
14. Dominion should advise customers to enable disk encryption on EMS systems and to increase the retention period of the Windows security event log.
15. The Bureau of Elections should audit the physical security of county EMSes.
16. The Bureau of Elections should require election technology, including EMSes, to promptly receive all appropriate security updates. 49
17. Counties that transmit scanner results over the Internet or using wireless modems should discontinue these practices, as recommended by the Michigan Election Security Advisory Commission [25].
18. Jurisdictions should consider enabling the capability of their scanners to save ballot images. These could help resolve questions about the accuracy of results in future incidents, especially if the integrity of the paper trail is questioned.
19. Jurisdictions should retain electronic election records, such as memory cards and EMS data, for as long as physical records. These provide important evidence for investigating (or disproving) problems later discovered or alleged.
20. When future election incidents occur, even if they receive less public attention than the events in Antrim County, states should consider performing investigations like this one, to ensure that the problems are well understood and that any lessons are disseminated to help other jurisdictions avoid similar issues.
Related to #5: https://countthevote.info/what-is-a-poll-tape/
At https://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(r0lzxpnpymufog2myxgxs3ut))/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-Act-116-of-1954 I used their search box to learn about Michigans poll tape and this is what I got back…
(0 found)
Search Criteria: Full Text = “poll” AND “tape”; Object Name = mcl-Act-116-of-1954
When 20 out of 20 recommendations from the State’s expert witness’ include the word ‘should’ I would think the Democrat party would tread lightly with their accusations regarding electoral security when it appears it’s the politicians in office who are assigned the control of election security.
The progressives have been in control going on two years now and Michigan citizens might have believed that any problems connected to the election process would have been considered a priority among priorities and the Democrats in control would be publicizing the corrective actions being put in place to ensure the most basic right in a Constitutional Republic; an honest, trusted and sober election.
One more story about purchasing voting machines on eBay in 2016 this time…
https://www.wired.com/story/i-bought-used-voting-machines-on-ebay/
It’s so interesting I’m including it:
IN 2016, I bought two voting machines online for less than $100 apiece. I didn’t even have to search the dark web. I found them on eBay.
Surely, I thought, these machines would have strict guidelines for lifecycle control like other sensitive equipment, like medical devices. I was wrong. I was able to purchase a pair of direct-recording electronic voting machines and have them delivered to my home in just a few days. I did this again just a few months ago. Alarmingly, they are still available to buy online.
WIRED OPINION
ABOUT
Brian Varner is a Symantec special projects researcher on the Cyber Security Services team, leading the company’s CyberWar Games and emerging technologies development. He previously worked at the National Security Agency as a tactical analyst.
If getting voting machines delivered to my door was shockingly easy, getting inside them proved to be simpler still. The tamper-proof screws didn’t work, all the computing equipment was still intact, and the hard drives had not been wiped. The information I found on the drives, including candidates, precincts, and the number of votes cast on the machine, were not encrypted. Worse, the “Property Of” government labels were still attached, meaning someone had sold government property filled with voter information and location data online, at a low cost, with no consequences. It would be the equivalent of buying a surplus police car with the logos still on it.
My aim in purchasing voting machines was not to undermine our democracy. I’m a security researcher at Symantec who started buying the machines as part of an ongoing effort to identify their vulnerabilities and strengthen election security. In 2016, I was conducting preliminary research for our annual CyberWar Games, a company-wide competition where I design simulations for our employees to hack into. Since it was an election year, I decided to create a scenario incorporating the components of a modern election system. But if I were a malicious actor seeking to disrupt an election, this would be akin to a bank selling its old vault to an aspiring burglar.
I reverse-engineered the machines to understand how they could be manipulated. After removing the internal hard drive, I was able to access the file structure and operating system. Since the machines were not wiped after they were used in the 2012 presidential election, I got a great deal of insight into how the machines store the votes that were cast on them. Within hours, I was able to change the candidates’ names to be that of anyone I wanted. When the machine printed out the official record for the votes that were cast, it showed that the candidate’s name I invented had received the most votes on that particular machine.
This year, I bought two more machines to see if security had improved. To my dismay, I discovered that the newer model machines—those that were used in the 2016 election—are running Windows CE and have USB ports, along with other components, that make them even easier to exploit than the older ones. Our voting machines, billed as “next generation,” and still in use today, are worse than they were before—dispersed, disorganized, and susceptible to manipulation.
To be fair, there has been some progress since the last Presidential election, including the development of internal policies for inspecting the machines for evidence of tampering. But while state and local election systems have been conducting risk assessments, we’ve also seen an 11-year-old successfully hacking a simulated voting website at DefCon, for fun.
A recent in-depth report on voting machine vulnerabilities concluded that a perpetrator would need physical access to the voting machine to exploit it. I concur with that assessment. When I reverse-engineered voting machines in 2016, I noticed that they were using a smart card as a means of authenticating a user and allowing them to vote. There are many documented liabilities in certain types of smart cards that are used, from Satellite receiver cards to bank chip cards. By using a $15 palm-sized device, my team was able to exploit a smart chip card, allowing us to vote multiple times.
In most parts of the public and private sector, it would be unthinkable that such a sensitive process would be so insecure. Try to imagine a major bank leaving ATMs with known vulnerabilities in service nationwide, or a healthcare provider identifying a problem in how it stores patient data, then leaving it unpatched after public outcry. It just doesn’t fit with our understanding of cyber security in 2018.
Those industries are governed by regulations that outline how sensitive information and equipment must be handled. The same common-sense regulations don’t exist for election systems. PCI and HIPAA are great successes that have gone a long way in protecting personally identifiable information and patient health conditions. Somehow, there is no corollary for the security of voters, their information and, most importantly, the votes they cast.
Since these machines are for sale online, individuals, precincts, or adversaries could buy them, modify them, and put them back online for sale. Envision a scenario in which foreign actors purchased these voting machines. By reverse engineering the machine like I did to exploit its weaknesses, they could compromise a small number of ballot boxes in a particular precinct. That’s the greatest fear of election security researchers: not wholesale flipping of millions of votes, which would be easy to detect, but a small, public breach of security that would sow massive distrust throughout the entire election ecosystem. If anyone can prove that the electoral process can be subverted, even in a small way, repairing the public’s trust will be far costlier than implementing security measures.
I recognize that states are fiercely protective of their rights. But there’s an opportunity here to develop nationwide policies and security protocols that would govern how voting machines are secured. This could be accomplished with input from multiple sectors, in a process similar to the development of the NIST framework—now widely recognized as one of the most comprehensive cybersecurity frameworks in use.
Many of the rules we believe should be put into place are uncomplicated and inexpensive. For starters, we can institute lifecycle management of the components that make up the election system. By simply regulating and monitoring the sale of used voting machines more closely, we would create a huge barrier to bad actors.
The fact that information is stored unencrypted on hard drives simply makes no sense in the current threat environment. That they can be left on devices, unencrypted, that are then sold on the open market is malpractice.
Finally, we must educate our poll workers and voters to be aware of suspicious behavior. One vulnerability we uncovered in voting machines is the chip card used in electronic voting machines. This inexpensive card can be purchased for $15 and programmed with simple code that allows the user to vote multiple times. This is something that we believe could be avoided with well-trained, alert poll workers.
Time and effort are our main obstacles to better policies. When it comes to securing our elections, that’s a low bar. We must do better; the alternative is too scary to consider in our current environment. Through increased training, public policy, and a little common sense, we can greatly enhance the security and integrity of our electoral process.
WIRED Opinion publishes pieces written by outside contributors and represents a wide range of viewpoints. Read more opinions here.
At least the elected are getting around to fixing the roads and bridges after twenty or so years of campaigning on infrastructure promises.
You might be interested in this news…
That means more change is a comin’ it just isn’t clear what it is. I thought you might see something pertinent I missed.
By the Bye, it’s buy Michigan week. Everything’s for sale.
The free range nature of the machines is becoming so widely recognized they are being referred to now as ‘tabulating devices’ by the press. You’ll might even hear the terms ‘tabulating devices’ or ‘tabulating machines’ frequently during the Trump show trial.
Here’s the Gateway Pundit story in case you missed it.
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/08/breaking-michigan-democrat-ag-follows-lead-bidens-doj/
Far left Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel on Tuesday charged her former Republican foe Attorney Matthew DePerno for daring to look at a Dominion voting machine following the 2020 presidential election.
This is now against the law in Democrat-run Michigan.
Nessel previously appointed a special counsel to investigate her Republican opponent Deperno just weeks before the general election
Nessel has made threats against Matthew DePerno since last year before the midterm elections.
The Record-Eagle delivers the story chapter and verse.
Regardless, between both the GP and the Record-Eagle you still haven’t heard anything of significance that informs you of how our Constitution is constantly targeted by progressives. If you understood how insidious the progressive devotees are, you would wonder why Trump’s
attorney Alina Habba would choose that particular color to adorn herself with on the day of her clients arraignment.
Stand by; school is about to open.
George Washington’s Response to Woodrow Wilson
Imagine my surprise after learning Woodrow Wilson based his right to change our Constitutional government was gained from George Washington himself. That story needed checking out.
Wilson, admired for his brilliance from coast-to-coast, chose to purposely use his popularity to get away with a staggering misinterpretation of Washington’s farewell speech. Wilson’s out of context claim twisted Washington’s words into an endorsement for disengaging from the framework of our Constitution that, up until Wilson’s manipulations, protected American citizens from the kind of political system Wilson was working to convince the citizens is needed.
I lifted Wilson’s speech from https://constitutingamerica.org/what-is-progress-by-woodrow-wilson-1856-1924-reprinted-from-the-u-s-constitution-a-reader-published-by-hillsdale-college/. The George Washington responses to the Progressive madness is found in George Washington’s Farewell Address at The Avalon Project. Read Washington’s words and try to find just where Wilson claims his Progressive right to destroy our Nation came from.
This message is meant to be the prerequisite to understanding why the release of political mis-, dis-, and mal-information discussed in the next post that affects our ability to comprehend the immediate and full impact of the ‘resets’ we are subject to without benefit of having the right to publicly discuss the possible results of any political action planned or taken by the political leaders and presented as beneficial to the citizens.
Washington’s words are in bold.
On with the show.
After earning a Ph.D. in both history and political science at Johns Hopkins University, Wilson held various academic positions, culminating in the presidency of Princeton University. Throughout this period, he came to see the Constitution as a cumbersome instrument unfit for the government of a large and vibrant nation. This speech, delivered during his successful campaign for president in 1912 and included in a collection of speeches called The New Freedom, puts forward the idea of an evolving, or “living,” constitution.
1913
In that sage and veracious chronicle, “Alice Through the Looking-Glass,” it is recounted how, on a noteworthy occasion, the little heroine is seized by the Red Chess Queen, who races her off at a terrific pace. They run until both of them are out of breath; then they stop, and Alice looks around her and says, “Why, we are just where we were when we started!” “Oh, yes,” says the Red Queen; “you have to run twice as fast as that to get anywhere else.”
The period for a new election of a citizen to administer the executive government of the United States being not far distant, and the time actually arrived when your thoughts must be employed in designating the person who is to be clothed with that important trust, it appears to me proper, especially as it may conduce to a more distinct expression of the public voice, that I should now apprise you of the resolution I have formed, to decline being considered among the number of those out of whom a choice is to be made.
That is a parable of progress. The laws of this country have not kept up with the change of economic circumstances in this country; they have not kept up with the change of political circumstances; and therefore we are not even where we were when we started. We shall have to run, not until we are out of breath, but until we have caught up with our own conditions, before we shall be where we were when we started; when we started this great experiment which has been the hope and the beacon of the world. And we should have to run twice as fast as any rational program I have seen in order to get anywhere else.
I beg you, at the same time, to do me the justice to be assured that this resolution has not been taken without a strict regard to all the considerations appertaining to the relation which binds a dutiful citizen to his country; and that in withdrawing the tender of service, which silence in my situation might imply, I am influenced by no diminution of zeal for your future interest, no deficiency of grateful respect for your past kindness, but am supported by a full conviction that the step is compatible with both.
I am, therefore, forced to be a progressive, if for no other reason, because we have not kept up with our changes of conditions, either in the economic field or in the political field. We have not kept up as well as other nations have. We have not kept our practices adjusted to the facts of the case, and until we do, and unless we do, the facts of the case will always have the better of the argument; because if you do not adjust your laws to the facts, so much the worse for the laws, not for the facts, because law trails along after the facts. Only that law is unsafe which runs ahead of the facts and beckons to it and makes it follow the will-o’-the-wisps of imaginative projects.
The acceptance of, and continuance hitherto in, the office to which your suffrages have twice called me have been a uniform sacrifice of inclination to the opinion of duty and to a deference for what appeared to be your desire. I constantly hoped that it would have been much earlier in my power, consistently with motives which I was not at liberty to disregard, to return to that retirement from which I had been reluctantly drawn. The strength of my inclination to do this, previous to the last election, had even led to the preparation of an address to declare it to you; but mature reflection on the then perplexed and critical posture of our affairs with foreign nations, and the unanimous advice of persons entitled to my confidence, impelled me to abandon the idea.
Business is in a situation in America which it was never in before; it is in a situation to which we have not adjusted our laws. Our laws are still meant for business done by individuals; they have not been satisfactorily adjusted to business done by great combinations, and we have got to adjust them. I do not say we may or may not; I say we must; there is no choice. If your laws do not fit your facts, the facts are not injured, the law is damaged; because the law, unless I have studied it amiss, is the expression of the facts in legal relationships. Laws have never altered the facts; laws have always necessarily expressed the facts; adjusted interests as they have arisen and have changed toward one another.
I rejoice that the state of your concerns, external as well as internal, no longer renders the pursuit of inclination incompatible with the sentiment of duty or propriety, and am persuaded, whatever partiality may be retained for my services, that, in the present circumstances of our country, you will not disapprove my determination to retire.
Politics in America is in a case which sadly requires attention. The system set up by our law and our usage doesn’t work,–or at least it can’t be depended on; it is made to work only by a most unreasonable expenditure of labor and pains. The government, which was designed for the people, has got into the hands of bosses and their employers, the special interests. An invisible empire has been set up above the forms of democracy.
The impressions with which I first undertook the arduous trust were explained on the proper occasion. In the discharge of this trust, I will only say that I have, with good intentions, contributed towards the organization and administration of the government the best exertions of which a very fallible judgment was capable. Not unconscious in the outset of the inferiority of my qualifications, experience in my own eyes, perhaps still more in the eyes of others, has strengthened the motives to diffidence of myself; and every day the increasing weight of years admonishes me more and more that the shade of retirement is as necessary to me as it will be welcome. Satisfied that if any circumstances have given peculiar value to my services, they were temporary, I have the consolation to believe that, while choice and prudence invite me to quit the political scene, patriotism does not forbid it.
There are serious things to do. Does any man doubt the great discontent in this country? Does any man doubt that there are grounds and justifications for discontent? Do we dare stand still? Within the past few months we have witnessed (along with other strange political phenomena, eloquently significant of popular uneasiness) on one side a doubling of the Socialist vote and on the other the posting on dead walls and hoardings all over the country of certain very attractive and diverting bills warning citizens that it was “better to be safe than sorry” and advising them to “let well enough alone.” Apparently a good many citizens doubted whether the situation they were advised to let alone was really well enough, and concluded that they would take a chance of being sorry. To me, these counsels of do-nothingism, these counsels of sitting still for fear something would happen, these counsels addressed to the hopeful, energetic people of the United States, telling them that they are not wise enough to touch their own affairs without marring them, constitute the most extraordinary argument of fatuous ignorance I ever heard. Americans are not yet cowards. True, their self-reliance has been sapped by years of submission to the doctrine that prosperity is something that benevolent magnates provide for them with the aid of the government; their self-reliance has been weakened, but not so utterly destroyed that you can twit them about it. The American people are not naturally stand-patters. Progress is the word that charms their ears and stirs their hearts.
In looking forward to the moment which is intended to terminate the career of my public life, my feelings do not permit me to suspend the deep acknowledgment of that debt of gratitude which I owe to my beloved country for the many honors it has conferred upon me; still more for the steadfast confidence with which it has supported me; and for the opportunities I have thence enjoyed of manifesting my inviolable attachment, by services faithful and persevering, though in usefulness unequal to my zeal. If benefits have resulted to our country from these services, let it always be remembered to your praise, and as an instructive example in our annals, that under circumstances in which the passions, agitated in every direction, were liable to mislead, amidst appearances sometimes dubious, vicissitudes of fortune often discouraging, in situations in which not unfrequently want of success has countenanced the spirit of criticism, the constancy of your support was the essential prop of the efforts, and a guarantee of the plans by which they were effected. Profoundly penetrated with this idea, I shall carry it with me to my grave, as a strong incitement to unceasing vows that heaven may continue to you the choicest tokens of its beneficence; that your union and brotherly affection may be perpetual; that the free Constitution, which is the work of your hands, may be sacredly maintained; that its administration in every department may be stamped with wisdom and virtue; that, in fine, the happiness of the people of these States, under the auspices of liberty, may be made complete by so careful a preservation and so prudent a use of this blessing as will acquire to them the glory of recommending it to the applause, the affection, and adoption of every nation which is yet a stranger to it.
There are, of course, Americans who have not yet heard that anything is going on. The circus might come to town, have the big parade and go, without their catching a sight of the camels or a note of the calliope. There are people, even Americans, who never move themselves or know that anything else is moving.
Here, perhaps, I ought to stop. But a solicitude for your welfare, which cannot end but with my life, and the apprehension of danger, natural to that solicitude, urge me, on an occasion like the present, to offer to your solemn contemplation, and to recommend to your frequent review, some sentiments which are the result of much reflection, of no inconsiderable observation, and which appear to me all-important to the permanency of your felicity as a people. These will be offered to you with the more freedom, as you can only see in them the disinterested warnings of a parting friend, who can possibly have no personal motive to bias his counsel. Nor can I forget, as an encouragement to it, your indulgent reception of my sentiments on a former and not dissimilar occasion.
A friend of mine who had heard of the Florida “cracker,” as they call a certain ne’er-do-well portion of the population down there, when passing through the State in a train, asked some one to point out a “cracker” to him. The man asked replied, “Well, if you see something off in the woods that looks brown, like a stump, you will know it is either a stump or a cracker; if it moves, it is a stump.”
Interwoven as is the love of liberty with every ligament of your hearts, no recommendation of mine is necessary to fortify or confirm the attachment.
Now, movement has no virtue in itself. Change is not worth while for its own sake. I am not one of those who love variety for its own sake. If a thing is good today, I should like to have it stay that way tomorrow. Most of our calculations in life are dependent upon things staying the way they are. For example, if, when you got up this morning, you had forgotten how to dress, if you had forgotten all about those ordinary things which you do almost automatically, which you can almost do half awake, you would have to find out what you did yesterday. I am told by the psychologists that if I did not remember who I was yesterday, I should not know who I am today, and that, therefore, my very identity depends upon my being able to tally today with yesterday. If they do not tally, then I am confused; I do not know who I am, and I have to go around and ask somebody to tell me my name and where I came from.
The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts.
I am not one of those who wish to break connection with the past; I am not one of those who wish to change for the mere sake of variety. The only men who do that are the men who want to forget something, the men who filled yesterday with something they would rather not recollect today, and so go about seeking diversion, seeking abstraction in something that will blot out recollection, or seeking to put something into them which will blot out all recollection. Change is not worth while unless it is improvement. If I move out of my present house because I do not like it, then I have got to choose a better house, or build a better house, to justify the change.
For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest. Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principles. You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint counsels, and joint efforts of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.
It would seem a waste of time to point out that ancient distinction,–between mere change and improvement. Yet there is a class of mind that is prone to confuse them. We have had political leaders whose conception of greatness was to be forever frantically doing something,–it mattered little what; restless, vociferous men, without sense of the energy of concentration, knowing only the energy of succession. Now, life does not consist of eternally running to a fire. There is no virtue in going anywhere unless you will gain something by being there. The direction is just as important as the impetus of motion.
But these considerations, however powerfully they address themselves to your sensibility, are greatly outweighed by those which apply more immediately to your interest. Here every portion of our country finds the most commanding motives for carefully guarding and preserving the union of the whole.
All progress depends on how fast you are going, and where you are going, and I fear there has been too much of this thing of knowing neither how fast we were going or where we were going. I have my private belief that we have been doing most of our progressiveness after the fashion of those things that in my boyhood days we called “treadmills,”–a treadmill being a moving platform, with cleats on it, on which some poor devil of a mule was forced to walk forever without getting anywhere. Elephants and even other animals have been known to turn treadmills, making a good deal of noise, and causing certain wheels to go round, and I daresay grinding out some sort of product for somebody, but without achieving much progress. Lately, in an effort to persuade the elephant to move, really, his friends tried dynamite. It moved,–in separate and scattered parts, but it moved.
The North, in an unrestrained intercourse with the South, protected by the equal laws of a common government, finds in the productions of the latter great additional resources of maritime and commercial enterprise and precious materials of manufacturing industry. The South, in the same intercourse, benefiting by the agency of the North, sees its agriculture grow and its commerce expand. Turning partly into its own channels the seamen of the North, it finds its particular navigation invigorated; and, while it contributes, in different ways, to nourish and increase the general mass of the national navigation, it looks forward to the protection of a maritime strength, to which itself is unequally adapted. The East, in a like intercourse with the West, already finds, and in the progressive improvement of interior communications by land and water, will more and more find a valuable vent for the commodities which it brings from abroad, or manufactures at home. The West derives from the East supplies requisite to its growth and comfort, and, what is perhaps of still greater consequence, it must of necessity owe the secure enjoyment of indispensable outlets for its own productions to the weight, influence, and the future maritime strength of the Atlantic side of the Union, directed by an indissoluble community of interest as one nation. Any other tenure by which the West can hold this essential advantage, whether derived from its own separate strength, or from an apostate and unnatural connection with any foreign power, must be intrinsically precarious.
A cynical but witty Englishman said, in a book, not long ago, that it was a mistake to say of a conspicuously successful man, eminent in his line of business, that you could not bribe a man like that, because, he said, the point about such men is that they have been bribed–not in the ordinary meaning of that word, not in any gross, corrupt sense, but they have achieved their great success by means of the existing order of things and therefore they have been put under bonds to see that that existing order of things is not changed; they are bribed to maintain the status quo.
While, then, every part of our country thus feels an immediate and particular interest in union, all the parts combined cannot fail to find in the united mass of means and efforts greater strength, greater resource, proportionably greater security from external danger, a less frequent interruption of their peace by foreign nations; and, what is of inestimable value, they must derive from union an exemption from those broils and wars between themselves, which so frequently afflict neighboring countries not tied together by the same governments, which their own rival ships alone would be sufficient to produce, but which opposite foreign alliances, attachments, and intrigues would stimulate and embitter. Hence, likewise, they will avoid the necessity of those overgrown military establishments which, under any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty. In this sense it is that your union ought to be considered as a main prop of your liberty, and that the love of the one ought to endear to you the preservation of the other.
It was for that reason that I used to say, when I had to do with the administration of an educational institution, that I should like to make the young gentlemen of the rising generation as unlike their fathers as possible. Not because their fathers lacked character or intelligence or knowledge or patriotism, but because their fathers, by reason of their advancing years and their established position in society, had lost touch with the processes of life; they had forgotten what it was to begin; they had forgotten what it was to rise; they had forgotten what it was to be dominated by the circumstances of their life on their way up from the bottom to the top, and, therefore, they were out of sympathy with the creative, formative and progressive forces of society.
These considerations speak a persuasive language to every reflecting and virtuous mind, and exhibit the continuance of the Union as a primary object of patriotic desire. Is there a doubt whether a common government can embrace so large a sphere? Let experience solve it. To listen to mere speculation in such a case were criminal. We are authorized to hope that a proper organization of the whole with the auxiliary agency of governments for the respective subdivisions, will afford a happy issue to the experiment. It is well worth a fair and full experiment. With such powerful and obvious motives to union, affecting all parts of our country, while experience shall not have demonstrated its impracticability, there will always be reason to distrust the patriotism of those who in any quarter may endeavor to weaken its bands.
Progress! Did you ever reflect that that word is almost a new one? No word comes more often or more naturally to the lips of modern man, as if the thing it stands for were almost synonymous with life itself, and yet men through many thousand years never talked or thought of progress. They thought in the other direction. Their stories of heroisms and glory were tales of the past. The ancestor wore the heavier armor and carried the larger spear. “There were giants in those days.” Now all that has altered. We think of the future, not the past, as the more glorious time in comparison with which the present is nothing. Progress, development,–those are modern words. The modern idea is to leave the past and press onward to something new.
In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection. The inhabitants of our Western country have lately had a useful lesson on this head; they have seen, in the negotiation by the Executive, and in the unanimous ratification by the Senate, of the treaty with Spain, and in the universal satisfaction at that event, throughout the United States, a decisive proof how unfounded were the suspicions propagated among them of a policy in the General Government and in the Atlantic States unfriendly to their interests in regard to the Mississippi; they have been witnesses to the formation of two treaties, that with Great Britain, and that with Spain, which secure to them everything they could desire, in respect to our foreign relations, towards confirming their prosperity. Will it not be their wisdom to rely for the preservation of these advantages on the Union by which they were procured ? Will they not henceforth be deaf to those advisers, if such there are, who would sever them from their brethren and connect them with aliens?
But what is progress going to do with the past, and with the present? How is it going to treat them? With ignominy, or respect? Should it break with them altogether, or rise out of them, with its roots still deep in the older time? What attitude shall progressives take toward the existing order, toward those institutions of conservatism, the Constitution, the laws, and the courts?
To the efficacy and permanency of your Union, a government for the whole is indispensable. No alliance, however strict, between the parts can be an adequate substitute; they must inevitably experience the infractions and interruptions which all alliances in all times have experienced. Sensible of this momentous truth, you have improved upon your first essay, by the adoption of a constitution of government better calculated than your former for an intimate union, and for the efficacious management of your common concerns. This government, the offspring of our own choice, uninfluenced and unawed, adopted upon full investigation and mature deliberation, completely free in its principles, in the distribution of its powers, uniting security with energy, and containing within itself a provision for its own amendment, has a just claim to your confidence and your support. Respect for its authority, compliance with its laws, acquiescence in its measures, are duties enjoined by the fundamental maxims of true liberty. The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government.
Are those thoughtful men who fear that we are now about to disturb the ancient foundations of our institutions justified in their fear? If they are, we ought to go very slowly about the processes of change. If it is indeed true that we have grown tired of the institutions which we have so carefully and sedulously built up, then we ought to go very slowly and very carefully about the very dangerous task of altering them. We ought, therefore, to ask ourselves, first of all, whether thought in this country is tending to do anything by which we shall retrace our steps, or by which we shall change the whole direction of our development?
All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.
I believe, for one, that you cannot tear up ancient rootages and safely plant the tree of liberty in soil which is not native to it. I believe that the ancient traditions of a people are its ballast; you cannot make a tabula rasa upon which to write a political program. You cannot take a new sheet of paper and determine what your life shall be tomorrow. You must knit the new into the old. You cannot put a new patch on an old garment without ruining it; it must be not a patch, but something woven into the old fabric, of practically the same pattern, of the same texture and intention. If I did not believe that to be progressive was to preserve the essentials of our institutions, I for one could not be a progressive.
However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.
One of the chief benefits I used to derive from being president of a university was that I had the pleasure of entertaining thoughtful men from all over the world. I cannot tell you how much has dropped into my granary by their presence. I had been casting around in my mind for something by which to draw several parts of my political thought together when it was my good fortune to entertain a very interesting Scotsman who had been devoting himself to the philosophical thought of the seventeenth century. His talk was so engaging that it was delightful to hear him speak of anything, and presently there came out of the unexpected region of his thought the thing I had been waiting for. He called my attention to the fact that in every generation all sorts of speculation and thinking tend to fall under the formula of the dominant thought of the age. For example, after the Newtonian Theory of the universe had been developed, almost all thinking tended to express itself in the analogies of the Newtonian Theory, and since the Darwinian Theory has reigned amongst us, everybody is likely to express whatever he wishes to expound in terms of development and accommodation to environment.
Towards the preservation of your government, and the permanency of your present happy state, it is requisite, not only that you steadily discountenance irregular oppositions to its acknowledged authority, but also that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the Constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown. In all the changes to which you may be invited, remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of governments as of other human institutions; that experience is the surest standard by which to test the real tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes, upon the credit of mere hypothesis and opinion, exposes to perpetual change, from the endless variety of hypothesis and opinion; and remember, especially, that for the efficient management of your common interests, in a country so extensive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is indispensable. Liberty itself will find in such a government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted, its surest guardian. It is, indeed, little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property.
Now, it came to me, as this interesting man talked, that the Constitution of the United States had been made under the dominion of the Newtonian Theory. You have only to read the papers of The Federalist to see that fact written on every page. They speak of the “checks and balances” of the Constitution, and use to express their idea the simile of the organization of the universe, and particularly of the solar system,–how by the attraction of gravitation the various parts are held in their orbits; and then they proceed to represent Congress, the Judiciary, and the President as a sort of imitation of the solar system.
I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
They were only following the English Whigs, who gave Great Britain its modern constitution. Not that those Englishmen analyzed the matter, or had any theory about it; Englishmen care little for theories. It was a Frenchman, Montesquieu, who pointed out to them how faithfully they had copied Newton’s description of the mechanism of the heavens.
This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
The makers of our Federal Constitution read Montesquieu with true scientific enthusiasm. They were scientists in their way,–the best way of their age,–those fathers of the nation. Jefferson wrote of “the laws of Nature,”–and then by way of afterthought,–”and of Nature’s God.” And they constructed a government as they would have constructed an orrery,–to display the laws of nature. Politics in their thought was a variety of mechanics. The Constitution was founded on the law of gravitation. The government was to exist and move by virtue of the efficacy of “checks and balances.”
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.
The trouble with the theory is that government is not a machine, but a living thing. It falls, not under the theory of the universe, but under the theory of organic life. It is accountable to Darwin, not to Newton. It is modified by its environment, necessitated by its tasks, shaped to its functions by the sheer pressure of life. No living thing can have its organs offset against each other, as checks, and live. On the contrary, its life is dependent upon their quick cooperation, their ready response to the commands of instinct or intelligence, their amicable community of purpose.Government is not a body of blind forces; it is a body of men, with highly differentiated functions, no doubt, in our modern day, of specialization, with a common task and purpose. Their cooperation is indispensable, their warfare fatal. There can be no successful government without the intimate, instinctive coordination of the organs of life and action. This is not theory, but fact, and displays its force as fact, whatever theories may be thrown across its track. Living political constitutions must be Darwinian in structure and in practice. Society is a living organism and must obey the laws of life, not of mechanics; it must develop.
Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
All that progressives ask or desire is permission–in an era when “development,” “evolution,” is the scientific word–to interpret the Constitution according to the Darwinian principle; all they ask is recognition of the fact that a nation is a living thing and not a machine.
It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
Some citizens of this country have never got beyond the Declaration of Independence, signed in Philadelphia, July 4th, 1776. Their bosoms swell against George III, but they have no consciousness of the war for freedom that is going on today.
There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.
The Declaration of Independence did not mention the questions of our day. It is of no consequence to us unless we can translate its general terms into examples of the present day and substitute them in some vital way for the examples it itself gives, so concrete, so intimately involved in the circumstances of the day in which it was conceived and written. It is an eminently practical document, meant for the use of practical men; not a thesis for philosophers, but a whip for tyrants; not a theory of government, but a program of action. Unless we can translate it into the questions of our own day, we are not worthy of it, we are not the sons of the sires who acted in response to its challenge.
It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositaries, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.
What form does the contest between tyranny and freedom take today? What is the special form of tyranny we now fight? How does it endanger the rights of the people, and what do we mean to do in order to make our contest against it effectual? What are to be the items of our new declaration of independence?
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
By tyranny, as we now fight it, we mean control of the law, of legislation and adjudication, by organizations which do not represent the people, by means which are private and selfish. We mean, specifically, the conduct of our affairs and the shaping of our legislation in the interest of special bodies of capital and those who organize their use. We mean the alliance, for this purpose, of political machines with selfish business. We mean the exploitation of the people by legal and political means. We have seen many of our governments under these influences cease to be representative governments, cease to be governments representative of the people, and become governments representative of special interests, controlled by machines, which in their turn are not controlled by the people.
It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?
Sometimes, when I think of the growth of our economic system, it seems to me as if, leaving our law just about where it was before any of the modern inventions or developments took place, we had simply at haphazard extended the family residence, added an office here and a workroom there, and a new set of sleeping rooms there, built up higher on our foundations, and put out little lean-tos on the side, until we have a structure that has no character whatever. Now, the problem is to continue to live in the house and yet change it.
Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.
Well, we are architects in our time, and our architects are also engineers. We don’t have to stop using a railroad terminal because a new station is being built. We don’t have to stop any of the processes of our lives because we are rearranging the structures in which we conduct those processes.What we have to undertake is to systematize the foundations of the house, then to thread all the old parts of the structure with the steel which will be laced together in modern fashion, accommodated to all the modern knowledge of structural strength and elasticity, and then slowly change the partitions, relay the walls, let in the light through new apertures, improve the ventilation; until finally, a generation or two from now, the scaffolding will be taken away, and there will be the family in a great building whose noble architecture will at last be disclosed, where men can live as a single community, cooperative as in a perfected, coordinated beehive, not afraid of any storm of nature, not afraid of any artificial storm, any imitation of thunder and lightning, knowing that the foundations go down to the bedrock of principle, and knowing that whenever they please they can change that plan again and accommodate it as they please to the altering necessities of their lives.
As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible, avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remembering also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it, avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertion in time of peace to discharge the debts which unavoidable wars may have occasioned, not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear. The execution of these maxims belongs to your representatives, but it is necessary that public opinion should co-operate. To facilitate to them the performance of their duty, it is essential that you should practically bear in mind that towards the payment of debts there must be revenue; that to have revenue there must be taxes; that no taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant; that the intrinsic embarrassment, inseparable from the selection of the proper objects (which is always a choice of difficulties), ought to be a decisive motive for a candid construction of the conduct of the government in making it, and for a spirit of acquiescence in the measures for obtaining revenue, which the public exigencies may at any time dictate.
But there are a great many men who don’t like the idea. Some wit recently said, in view of the fact that most of our American architects are trained in a certain École in Paris, that all American architecture in recent years was either bizarre or “Beaux Arts.” I think that our economic architecture is decidedly bizarre; and I am afraid that there is a good deal to learn about matters other than architecture from the same source from which our architects have learned a great many things. I don’t mean the School of Fine Arts at Paris, but the experience of France; for from the other side of the water men can now hold up against us the reproach that we have not adjusted our lives to modern conditions to the same extent that they have adjusted theirs. I was very much interested in some of the reasons given by our friends across the Canadian border for being very shy about the reciprocity arrangements. They said: “We are not sure whither these arrangements will lead, and we don’t care to associate too closely with the economic conditions of the United States until those conditions are as modern as ours.” And when I resented it, and asked for particulars, I had, in regard to many matters, to retire from the debate. Because I found that they had adjusted their regulations of economic development to conditions we had not yet found a way to meet in the United States.
Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it – It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period, a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that, in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages which might be lost by a steady adherence to it ? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue ? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?
Well, we have started now at all events. The procession is under way. The stand-patter doesn’t know there is a procession. He is asleep in the back part of his house. He doesn’t know that the road is resounding with the tramp of men going to the front. And when he wakes up, the country will be empty. He will be deserted, and he will wonder what has happened. Nothing has happened. The world has been going on. The world has a habit of going on. The world has a habit of leaving those behind who won’t go with it. The world has always neglected stand-patters. And, therefore, the stand-patter does not excite my indignation; he excites my sympathy. He is going to be so lonely before it is all over. And we are good fellows, we are good company; why doesn’t he come along? We are not going to do him any harm. We are going to show him a good time. We are going to climb the slow road until it reaches some upland where the air is fresher, where the whole talk of mere politicians is stilled, where men can look in each other’s faces and see that there is nothing to conceal, that all they have to talk about they are willing to talk about in the open and talk about with each other; and whence, looking back over the road, we shall see at last that we have fulfilled our promise to mankind. We had said to all the world, “America was created to break every kind of monopoly, and to set men free, upon a footing of equality, upon a footing of opportunity, to match their brains and their energies.” and now we have proved that we meant it.
In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations, has been the victim.
So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.
As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.
Woodrow Wilson, “What is Progress?” in The New Freedom (New York: Doubleday, Page, and Company, 1913), 33-54.Reprinted from The U.S. Constitution, A Reader, Published by Hillsdale College
Powered by PrintFriendly.com
Privacy
Washington’s Farewell Address 1796
1796
Friends and Citizens:
The period for a new election of a citizen to administer the executive government of the United States being not far distant, and the time actually arrived when your thoughts must be employed in designating the person who is to be clothed with that important trust, it appears to me proper, especially as it may conduce to a more distinct expression of the public voice, that I should now apprise you of the resolution I have formed, to decline being considered among the number of those out of whom a choice is to be made.
I beg you, at the same time, to do me the justice to be assured that this resolution has not been taken without a strict regard to all the considerations appertaining to the relation which binds a dutiful citizen to his country; and that in withdrawing the tender of service, which silence in my situation might imply, I am influenced by no diminution of zeal for your future interest, no deficiency of grateful respect for your past kindness, but am supported by a full conviction that the step is compatible with both.
The acceptance of, and continuance hitherto in, the office to which your suffrages have twice called me have been a uniform sacrifice of inclination to the opinion of duty and to a deference for what appeared to be your desire. I constantly hoped that it would have been much earlier in my power, consistently with motives which I was not at liberty to disregard, to return to that retirement from which I had been reluctantly drawn. The strength of my inclination to do this, previous to the last election, had even led to the preparation of an address to declare it to you; but mature reflection on the then perplexed and critical posture of our affairs with foreign nations, and the unanimous advice of persons entitled to my confidence, impelled me to abandon the idea.
I rejoice that the state of your concerns, external as well as internal, no longer renders the pursuit of inclination incompatible with the sentiment of duty or propriety, and am persuaded, whatever partiality may be retained for my services, that, in the present circumstances of our country, you will not disapprove my determination to retire.
The impressions with which I first undertook the arduous trust were explained on the proper occasion. In the discharge of this trust, I will only say that I have, with good intentions, contributed towards the organization and administration of the government the best exertions of which a very fallible judgment was capable. Not unconscious in the outset of the inferiority of my qualifications, experience in my own eyes, perhaps still more in the eyes of others, has strengthened the motives to diffidence of myself; and every day the increasing weight of years admonishes me more and more that the shade of retirement is as necessary to me as it will be welcome. Satisfied that if any circumstances have given peculiar value to my services, they were temporary, I have the consolation to believe that, while choice and prudence invite me to quit the political scene, patriotism does not forbid it.
In looking forward to the moment which is intended to terminate the career of my public life, my feelings do not permit me to suspend the deep acknowledgment of that debt of gratitude which I owe to my beloved country for the many honors it has conferred upon me; still more for the steadfast confidence with which it has supported me; and for the opportunities I have thence enjoyed of manifesting my inviolable attachment, by services faithful and persevering, though in usefulness unequal to my zeal. If benefits have resulted to our country from these services, let it always be remembered to your praise, and as an instructive example in our annals, that under circumstances in which the passions, agitated in every direction, were liable to mislead, amidst appearances sometimes dubious, vicissitudes of fortune often discouraging, in situations in which not unfrequently want of success has countenanced the spirit of criticism, the constancy of your support was the essential prop of the efforts, and a guarantee of the plans by which they were effected. Profoundly penetrated with this idea, I shall carry it with me to my grave, as a strong incitement to unceasing vows that heaven may continue to you the choicest tokens of its beneficence; that your union and brotherly affection may be perpetual; that the free Constitution, which is the work of your hands, may be sacredly maintained; that its administration in every department may be stamped with wisdom and virtue; that, in fine, the happiness of the people of these States, under the auspices of liberty, may be made complete by so careful a preservation and so prudent a use of this blessing as will acquire to them the glory of recommending it to the applause, the affection, and adoption of every nation which is yet a stranger to it.
Here, perhaps, I ought to stop. But a solicitude for your welfare, which cannot end but with my life, and the apprehension of danger, natural to that solicitude, urge me, on an occasion like the present, to offer to your solemn contemplation, and to recommend to your frequent review, some sentiments which are the result of much reflection, of no inconsiderable observation, and which appear to me all-important to the permanency of your felicity as a people. These will be offered to you with the more freedom, as you can only see in them the disinterested warnings of a parting friend, who can possibly have no personal motive to bias his counsel. Nor can I forget, as an encouragement to it, your indulgent reception of my sentiments on a former and not dissimilar occasion.
Interwoven as is the love of liberty with every ligament of your hearts, no recommendation of mine is necessary to fortify or confirm the attachment.
The unity of government which constitutes you one people is also now dear to you. It is justly so, for it is a main pillar in the edifice of your real independence, the support of your tranquility at home, your peace abroad; of your safety; of your prosperity; of that very liberty which you so highly prize. But as it is easy to foresee that, from different causes and from different quarters, much pains will be taken, many artifices employed to weaken in your minds the conviction of this truth; as this is the point in your political fortress against which the batteries of internal and external enemies will be most constantly and actively (though often covertly and insidiously) directed, it is of infinite moment that you should properly estimate the immense value of your national union to your collective and individual happiness; that you should cherish a cordial, habitual, and immovable attachment to it; accustoming yourselves to think and speak of it as of the palladium of your political safety and prosperity; watching for its preservation with jealous anxiety; discountenancing whatever may suggest even a suspicion that it can in any event be abandoned; and indignantly frowning upon the first dawning of every attempt to alienate any portion of our country from the rest, or to enfeeble the sacred ties which now link together the various parts.
For this you have every inducement of sympathy and interest. Citizens, by birth or choice, of a common country, that country has a right to concentrate your affections. The name of American, which belongs to you in your national capacity, must always exalt the just pride of patriotism more than any appellation derived from local discriminations. With slight shades of difference, you have the same religion, manners, habits, and political principles. You have in a common cause fought and triumphed together; the independence and liberty you possess are the work of joint counsels, and joint efforts of common dangers, sufferings, and successes.
But these considerations, however powerfully they address themselves to your sensibility, are greatly outweighed by those which apply more immediately to your interest. Here every portion of our country finds the most commanding motives for carefully guarding and preserving the union of the whole.
The North, in an unrestrained intercourse with the South, protected by the equal laws of a common government, finds in the productions of the latter great additional resources of maritime and commercial enterprise and precious materials of manufacturing industry. The South, in the same intercourse, benefiting by the agency of the North, sees its agriculture grow and its commerce expand. Turning partly into its own channels the seamen of the North, it finds its particular navigation invigorated; and, while it contributes, in different ways, to nourish and increase the general mass of the national navigation, it looks forward to the protection of a maritime strength, to which itself is unequally adapted. The East, in a like intercourse with the West, already finds, and in the progressive improvement of interior communications by land and water, will more and more find a valuable vent for the commodities which it brings from abroad, or manufactures at home. The West derives from the East supplies requisite to its growth and comfort, and, what is perhaps of still greater consequence, it must of necessity owe the secure enjoyment of indispensable outlets for its own productions to the weight, influence, and the future maritime strength of the Atlantic side of the Union, directed by an indissoluble community of interest as one nation. Any other tenure by which the West can hold this essential advantage, whether derived from its own separate strength, or from an apostate and unnatural connection with any foreign power, must be intrinsically precarious.
While, then, every part of our country thus feels an immediate and particular interest in union, all the parts combined cannot fail to find in the united mass of means and efforts greater strength, greater resource, proportionably greater security from external danger, a less frequent interruption of their peace by foreign nations; and, what is of inestimable value, they must derive from union an exemption from those broils and wars between themselves, which so frequently afflict neighboring countries not tied together by the same governments, which their own rival ships alone would be sufficient to produce, but which opposite foreign alliances, attachments, and intrigues would stimulate and embitter. Hence, likewise, they will avoid the necessity of those overgrown military establishments which, under any form of government, are inauspicious to liberty, and which are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty. In this sense it is that your union ought to be considered as a main prop of your liberty, and that the love of the one ought to endear to you the preservation of the other.
These considerations speak a persuasive language to every reflecting and virtuous mind, and exhibit the continuance of the Union as a primary object of patriotic desire. Is there a doubt whether a common government can embrace so large a sphere? Let experience solve it. To listen to mere speculation in such a case were criminal. We are authorized to hope that a proper organization of the whole with the auxiliary agency of governments for the respective subdivisions, will afford a happy issue to the experiment. It is well worth a fair and full experiment. With such powerful and obvious motives to union, affecting all parts of our country, while experience shall not have demonstrated its impracticability, there will always be reason to distrust the patriotism of those who in any quarter may endeavor to weaken its bands.
In contemplating the causes which may disturb our Union, it occurs as matter of serious concern that any ground should have been furnished for characterizing parties by geographical discriminations, Northern and Southern, Atlantic and Western; whence designing men may endeavor to excite a belief that there is a real difference of local interests and views. One of the expedients of party to acquire influence within particular districts is to misrepresent the opinions and aims of other districts. You cannot shield yourselves too much against the jealousies and heartburnings which spring from these misrepresentations; they tend to render alien to each other those who ought to be bound together by fraternal affection. The inhabitants of our Western country have lately had a useful lesson on this head; they have seen, in the negotiation by the Executive, and in the unanimous ratification by the Senate, of the treaty with Spain, and in the universal satisfaction at that event, throughout the United States, a decisive proof how unfounded were the suspicions propagated among them of a policy in the General Government and in the Atlantic States unfriendly to their interests in regard to the Mississippi; they have been witnesses to the formation of two treaties, that with Great Britain, and that with Spain, which secure to them everything they could desire, in respect to our foreign relations, towards confirming their prosperity. Will it not be their wisdom to rely for the preservation of these advantages on the Union by which they were procured ? Will they not henceforth be deaf to those advisers, if such there are, who would sever them from their brethren and connect them with aliens?
To the efficacy and permanency of your Union, a government for the whole is indispensable. No alliance, however strict, between the parts can be an adequate substitute; they must inevitably experience the infractions and interruptions which all alliances in all times have experienced. Sensible of this momentous truth, you have improved upon your first essay, by the adoption of a constitution of government better calculated than your former for an intimate union, and for the efficacious management of your common concerns. This government, the offspring of our own choice, uninfluenced and unawed, adopted upon full investigation and mature deliberation, completely free in its principles, in the distribution of its powers, uniting security with energy, and containing within itself a provision for its own amendment, has a just claim to your confidence and your support. Respect for its authority, compliance with its laws, acquiescence in its measures, are duties enjoined by the fundamental maxims of true liberty. The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their constitutions of government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people, is sacredly obligatory upon all. The very idea of the power and the right of the people to establish government presupposes the duty of every individual to obey the established government.
All obstructions to the execution of the laws, all combinations and associations, under whatever plausible character, with the real design to direct, control, counteract, or awe the regular deliberation and action of the constituted authorities, are destructive of this fundamental principle, and of fatal tendency. They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels and modified by mutual interests.
However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion.
Towards the preservation of your government, and the permanency of your present happy state, it is requisite, not only that you steadily discountenance irregular oppositions to its acknowledged authority, but also that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the Constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and thus to undermine what cannot be directly overthrown. In all the changes to which you may be invited, remember that time and habit are at least as necessary to fix the true character of governments as of other human institutions; that experience is the surest standard by which to test the real tendency of the existing constitution of a country; that facility in changes, upon the credit of mere hypothesis and opinion, exposes to perpetual change, from the endless variety of hypothesis and opinion; and remember, especially, that for the efficient management of your common interests, in a country so extensive as ours, a government of as much vigor as is consistent with the perfect security of liberty is indispensable. Liberty itself will find in such a government, with powers properly distributed and adjusted, its surest guardian. It is, indeed, little else than a name, where the government is too feeble to withstand the enterprises of faction, to confine each member of the society within the limits prescribed by the laws, and to maintain all in the secure and tranquil enjoyment of the rights of person and property.
I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.
This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.
The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.
Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.
It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume.
It is important, likewise, that the habits of thinking in a free country should inspire caution in those entrusted with its administration, to confine themselves within their respective constitutional spheres, avoiding in the exercise of the powers of one department to encroach upon another. The spirit of encroachment tends to consolidate the powers of all the departments in one, and thus to create, whatever the form of government, a real despotism. A just estimate of that love of power, and proneness to abuse it, which predominates in the human heart, is sufficient to satisfy us of the truth of this position. The necessity of reciprocal checks in the exercise of political power, by dividing and distributing it into different depositaries, and constituting each the guardian of the public weal against invasions by the others, has been evinced by experiments ancient and modern; some of them in our country and under our own eyes. To preserve them must be as necessary as to institute them. If, in the opinion of the people, the distribution or modification of the constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed. The precedent must always greatly overbalance in permanent evil any partial or transient benefit, which the use can at any time yield.
Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice ? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?
Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.
As a very important source of strength and security, cherish public credit. One method of preserving it is to use it as sparingly as possible, avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace, but remembering also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it, avoiding likewise the accumulation of debt, not only by shunning occasions of expense, but by vigorous exertion in time of peace to discharge the debts which unavoidable wars may have occasioned, not ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden which we ourselves ought to bear. The execution of these maxims belongs to your representatives, but it is necessary that public opinion should co-operate. To facilitate to them the performance of their duty, it is essential that you should practically bear in mind that towards the payment of debts there must be revenue; that to have revenue there must be taxes; that no taxes can be devised which are not more or less inconvenient and unpleasant; that the intrinsic embarrassment, inseparable from the selection of the proper objects (which is always a choice of difficulties), ought to be a decisive motive for a candid construction of the conduct of the government in making it, and for a spirit of acquiescence in the measures for obtaining revenue, which the public exigencies may at any time dictate.
Observe good faith and justice towards all nations; cultivate peace and harmony with all. Religion and morality enjoin this conduct; and can it be, that good policy does not equally enjoin it – It will be worthy of a free, enlightened, and at no distant period, a great nation, to give to mankind the magnanimous and too novel example of a people always guided by an exalted justice and benevolence. Who can doubt that, in the course of time and things, the fruits of such a plan would richly repay any temporary advantages which might be lost by a steady adherence to it ? Can it be that Providence has not connected the permanent felicity of a nation with its virtue ? The experiment, at least, is recommended by every sentiment which ennobles human nature. Alas! is it rendered impossible by its vices?
In the execution of such a plan, nothing is more essential than that permanent, inveterate antipathies against particular nations, and passionate attachments for others, should be excluded; and that, in place of them, just and amicable feelings towards all should be cultivated. The nation which indulges towards another a habitual hatred or a habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest. Antipathy in one nation against another disposes each more readily to offer insult and injury, to lay hold of slight causes of umbrage, and to be haughty and intractable, when accidental or trifling occasions of dispute occur. Hence, frequent collisions, obstinate, envenomed, and bloody contests. The nation, prompted by ill-will and resentment, sometimes impels to war the government, contrary to the best calculations of policy. The government sometimes participates in the national propensity, and adopts through passion what reason would reject; at other times it makes the animosity of the nation subservient to projects of hostility instigated by pride, ambition, and other sinister and pernicious motives. The peace often, sometimes perhaps the liberty, of nations, has been the victim.
So likewise, a passionate attachment of one nation for another produces a variety of evils. Sympathy for the favorite nation, facilitating the illusion of an imaginary common interest in cases where no real common interest exists, and infusing into one the enmities of the other, betrays the former into a participation in the quarrels and wars of the latter without adequate inducement or justification. It leads also to concessions to the favorite nation of privileges denied to others which is apt doubly to injure the nation making the concessions; by unnecessarily parting with what ought to have been retained, and by exciting jealousy, ill-will, and a disposition to retaliate, in the parties from whom equal privileges are withheld. And it gives to ambitious, corrupted, or deluded citizens (who devote themselves to the favorite nation), facility to betray or sacrifice the interests of their own country, without odium, sometimes even with popularity; gilding, with the appearances of a virtuous sense of obligation, a commendable deference for public opinion, or a laudable zeal for public good, the base or foolish compliances of ambition, corruption, or infatuation.
As avenues to foreign influence in innumerable ways, such attachments are particularly alarming to the truly enlightened and independent patriot. How many opportunities do they afford to tamper with domestic factions, to practice the arts of seduction, to mislead public opinion, to influence or awe the public councils. Such an attachment of a small or weak towards a great and powerful nation dooms the former to be the satellite of the latter.
Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and experience prove that foreign influence is one of the most baneful foes of republican government. But that jealousy to be useful must be impartial; else it becomes the instrument of the very influence to be avoided, instead of a defense against it. Excessive partiality for one foreign nation and excessive dislike of another cause those whom they actuate to see danger only on one side, and serve to veil and even second the arts of influence on the other. Real patriots who may resist the intrigues of the favorite are liable to become suspected and odious, while its tools and dupes usurp the applause and confidence of the people, to surrender their interests.
The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. Europe has a set of primary interests which to us have none; or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves by artificial ties in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.
Our detached and distant situation invites and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people under an efficient government. the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon to be scrupulously respected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon us, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.
Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor or caprice?
It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.
Taking care always to keep ourselves by suitable establishments on a respectable defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies.
Harmony, liberal intercourse with all nations, are recommended by policy, humanity, and interest. But even our commercial policy should hold an equal and impartial hand; neither seeking nor granting exclusive favors or preferences; consulting the natural course of things; diffusing and diversifying by gentle means the streams of commerce, but forcing nothing; establishing (with powers so disposed, in order to give trade a stable course, to define the rights of our merchants, and to enable the government to support them) conventional rules of intercourse, the best that present circumstances and mutual opinion will permit, but temporary, and liable to be from time to time abandoned or varied, as experience and circumstances shall dictate; constantly keeping in view that it is folly in one nation to look for disinterested favors from another; that it must pay with a portion of its independence for whatever it may accept under that character; that, by such acceptance, it may place itself in the condition of having given equivalents for nominal favors, and yet of being reproached with ingratitude for not giving more. There can be no greater error than to expect or calculate upon real favors from nation to nation. It is an illusion, which experience must cure, which a just pride ought to discard.
In offering to you, my countrymen, these counsels of an old and affectionate friend, I dare not hope they will make the strong and lasting impression I could wish; that they will control the usual current of the passions, or prevent our nation from running the course which has hitherto marked the destiny of nations. But, if I may even flatter myself that they may be productive of some partial benefit, some occasional good; that they may now and then recur to moderate the fury of party spirit, to warn against the mischiefs of foreign intrigue, to guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism; this hope will be a full recompense for the solicitude for your welfare, by which they have been dictated.
How far in the discharge of my official duties I have been guided by the principles which have been delineated, the public records and other evidences of my conduct must witness to you and to the world. To myself, the assurance of my own conscience is, that I have at least believed myself to be guided by them.
In relation to the still subsisting war in Europe, my proclamation of the twenty-second of April, I793, is the index of my plan. Sanctioned by your approving voice, and by that of your representatives in both houses of Congress, the spirit of that measure has continually governed me, uninfluenced by any attempts to deter or divert me from it.
After deliberate examination, with the aid of the best lights I could obtain, I was well satisfied that our country, under all the circumstances of the case, had a right to take, and was bound in duty and interest to take, a neutral position. Having taken it, I determined, as far as should depend upon me, to maintain it, with moderation, perseverance, and firmness.
The considerations which respect the right to hold this conduct, it is not necessary on this occasion to detail. I will only observe that, according to my understanding of the matter, that right, so far from being denied by any of the belligerent powers, has been virtually admitted by all.
The duty of holding a neutral conduct may be inferred, without anything more, from the obligation which justice and humanity impose on every nation, in cases in which it is free to act, to maintain inviolate the relations of peace and amity towards other nations.
The inducements of interest for observing that conduct will best be referred to your own reflections and experience. With me a predominant motive has been to endeavor to gain time to our country to settle and mature its yet recent institutions, and to progress without interruption to that degree of strength and consistency which is necessary to give it, humanly speaking, the command of its own fortunes.
Though, in reviewing the incidents of my administration, I am unconscious of intentional error, I am nevertheless too sensible of my defects not to think it probable that I may have committed many errors. Whatever they may be, I fervently beseech the Almighty to avert or mitigate the evils to which they may tend. I shall also carry with me the hope that my country will never cease to view them with indulgence; and that, after forty five years of my life dedicated to its service with an upright zeal, the faults of incompetent abilities will be consigned to oblivion, as myself must soon be to the mansions of rest.
Relying on its kindness in this as in other things, and actuated by that fervent love towards it, which is so natural to a man who views in it the native soil of himself and his progenitors for several generations, I anticipate with pleasing expectation that retreat in which I promise myself to realize, without alloy, the sweet enjoyment of partaking, in the midst of my fellow-citizens, the benign influence of good laws under a free government, the ever-favorite object of my heart, and the happy reward, as I trust, of our mutual cares, labors, and dangers.
Geo. Washington.