Principles Are the Antidote to Politics

A statue of Thomas Jefferson looking unimpressed in front of the Cuyahoga County Courthouse in Cleveland, Ohio, 2022. Kenneth Sponsler/Shutterstock

Commentary

Only 4 percent “of U.S. adults say the political system is working extremely or very well,” according to the Pew Research Center. Sixty-five percent say they “always or often feel exhausted when thinking about politics.” Yet we keep doubling down, thinking that more attention on politics will somehow fix what ails society.

In 2020, candidates spent more than $14 billion seeking the presidency. This was double the amount spent in 2016. The 2024 presidential campaign is far from over. How much will candidates spend this time to fix our attention on politics?

If you are one of those who find politics dispiriting, C.S. Lewis would understand.

In his essay “Membership,” contained in his collection “The Weight of Glory,” he wrote, “A sick society must think much about politics, as a sick man must think much about his digestion: to ignore the subject may be fatal cowardice for the one as for the other.”

Politics, Lewis explained, is not “the natural food of the mind” but a “necessary evil.” However, too much emphasis on politics has become “a new and deadly disease.”

He compared fresh fruit with canned fruit. The latter can be necessary for storage, but Lewis observed that he had met people who learned to prefer the tinned fruit to the fresh.

Similarly, among us are those who prefer to weigh the promises of candidates as a pathway to societal advancement rather than shore up the foundations of a free society.

If candidates still fix your mind on their empty promises, Ralph Waldo Emerson has an instant mindset cure.

In his essay “Experience,” he wrote, “A political orator wittily compared our party promises to western roads, which opened stately enough, with planted trees on either side, to tempt the traveler, but soon became narrow and narrower, and ended in a squirrel-track, and ran up a tree.”

Running ourselves up trees has consequences.

Milton Friedman, in “Capitalism and Freedom,” warned, “The use of political channels, while inevitable, tends to strain the social cohesion essential for a stable society.

“Every extension of the range of issues for which explicit agreement is sought strains further the delicate threads that hold society together.”

And then, as if he could see ahead to 2024, he said, “Fundamental differences in basic values can seldom if ever be resolved at the ballot box; ultimately they can only be decided, though not resolved, by conflict. The religious and civil wars of history are a bloody testament to this judgment.”

Friedman clearly articulates the antidote to politics:

“The widespread use of the market reduces the strain on the social fabric by rendering conformity unnecessary with respect to any activities it encompasses. The wider the range of activities covered by the market, the fewer are the issues on which explicitly political decisions are required and hence on which it is necessary to achieve agreement. In turn, the fewer the issues on which agreement is necessary, the greater is the likelihood of getting agreement while maintaining a free society.”

When someone declares unyielding loyalty to Tide detergent or Coca-Cola, that decision affects only that person and his or her family; the rest of us go about our business.

Yet there are many who say with great conviction, “I am a lifelong, loyal Democrat” or “I am a lifelong, loyal Republican.”

In the wake of fraudulent elections in Venezuela, some are saying they are unconditionally loyal to the corrupt President Nicolás Maduro.

In Stalin’s Soviet Union, some falsely accused of political crimes went willingly to their death as their last service to the Party.

Such loyalties are best reserved for totalitarian societies.

This is not the loyalty that built America.

What built and sustains America is loyalty to principles.

There are few more precise statements of loyalty to principles than Thomas Jefferson’s First Inaugural Address of 1801. At the start of his address, he reflected on the duty before him. Instead of boorishly setting out his vision, he spoke of the greatness in the country’s founding principles. Great principles, not great individuals, were required.

Jefferson said, “I approach [my duty] with those anxious and awful presentiments which the greatness of the charge and the weakness of my powers so justly inspire.”

An “awful presentiment” is a foreboding of disaster. He humbly recognized the limits of his personal power and did not bemoan the constitutional limits on the power of government.

Jefferson was clear that only his reliance on principles overcame his despair over the daunting responsibilities of the presidency. In the Constitution, he would “find resources of wisdom, of virtue, and of zeal on which to rely under all difficulties.”

Among the American principles, he said, were “equal and exact justice to all men, of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political; peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none; the support of the State governments in all their rights.”

Then Jefferson said:

“Principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation. The wisdom of our sages and blood of our heroes have been devoted to their attainment. They should be the creed of our political faith, the text of civic instruction, the touchstone by which we try the services of those we trust; and should we wander from them in moments of error or of alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and to regain the road which alone leads to peace, liberty, and safety.”

A claimed mandate at the ballot box must not be used to justify coercing others. On the contrary, he asked his audience to “bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.”

Jefferson understood that those who cannot even control themselves should hardly seek to control others.

“Sometimes it is said that man can not be trusted with the government of himself. Can he, then, be trusted with the government of others?” he asked.

If people must not control others, what should a “good government” do?

Jefferson delivered a clear answer: “A wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned.”

He advocated shared values to help maintain a good government, including “honesty, truth, temperance, gratitude, and the love of man.”

Some people believe the government is the source of a caring society; Jefferson found the roots of a caring society in each of our everyday encounters.

“Let us restore to social intercourse that harmony and affection without which liberty and even life itself are but dreary things,” he said.

In his most famous essay, “Self-Reliance,” Emerson issued a caution for his generation and ours: “A political victory ... or some other favorable event, raises your spirits, and you think good days are preparing for you. Do not believe it.”

Keeping in the spirit of Jefferson, Emerson ended “Self-Reliance” with his immortal line: “Nothing can bring you peace but yourself. Nothing can bring you peace but the triumph of principles.”

From the American Institute for Economic Research

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.