26 June 2008

Political pessimism was here before me; it will be here when I'm gone.

“The Constitution is a dead letter, except so far as it serves to prescribe the modes of election, the role of the majority, the distribution and tenure of offices, and the union and separation of the functions of government. Since 1828, it has been becoming in practice, and is now, substantially, a pure democracy, with no effective constitution but the will of the majority for the time being. Whether the change has been for the better or the worse, we need not stop to inquire. The change was inevitable, because men are more willing to advance themselves by flattering the people and perverting the Constitution, than they are by self-denial to serve their country. The change has been effected, and there is no return to the original theory of government. Any man who should plant himself on the Constitution, and attempt to arrest the democratic tendency,—no matter what his character, ability, virtues, services,—would be crushed and ground to powder. Your Calhouns must give way to your Polks and Van Burens, your Websters for your Harrisons and Tylers. No man, who is not prepared to play the demagogue, to stoop to flatter the people, and, in one direction or another, to exaggerate the democratic tendency, can receive the nomination for an important office, or have influence in public affairs. The reign of great men, of distinguished statesmen and firm patriots, is over, and that of the demagogues has begun. Your most important offices are hereafter to be filled by third and fourth-rate men,—men too insignificant to excite strong opposition, and too flexible in their principles not to be willing to take any direction the caprices of the mob—or the interests of the wire-pullers of the mob—may demand. Evil or no evil, such is the fact, and we must conform to it.”

-Orestes Brownson, “Catholicity Necessary to Sustain Popular Liberty” (1845). Essays and Reviews Chiefly on Theology, Politics, and Socialism. New York: D. & J. Sadlier & Co., 1852. (368-9)

Did you make it through all that? Good. The essay goes on to argue that although Protestantism might set a free government in place, only Catholicism can sustain it. The people manage the government, but only a truly authoritative religion can manage the people. Brownson, in this essay, never imagines the storm that will break two decades later, nor does he consider the possibility of a strong civil religion. Lincoln must have taken him by surprise.

It's interesting to see the famous names of Polk, Van Buren, Harrison, and Tyler disparaged in favor of Webster and Calhoun. Of course, the Speaker of the House was the most important figure in the government throughout much of the 19th century, especially under Henry Clay. But which of our buffoonish politicians will history choose to lift to the status of a featureless name in a list? In two hundred years, will the name “George W. Bush” be infamous, vindicated, or merely recited by bored schoolchildren? Brownson doesn't explain why Polk &co. are demagogues, but I certainly don't have the information at hand. (It is time, I suppose, that I read more U.S. History...)

By the way, did you see the date on that book? As best I could tell, it was part of the 1852 printing. I'm so happy that books predating the Civil War are in circulation in the UNC libraries. It's part of the magic of libraries.

No comments: