Or, On the Politics of Self Harm.
Janus Stator Astride the American Rift.
The American Revolution was a slow and cautious affair, handled by deliberating, cautious men. The average American either held property which he acquired by much toil and danger or cherish the prospects of acquiring property by similar means. Indeed the main grievance that the colonists begrudged the Crown for was its uprooting of traditional patterns and norms.
As the Overlordship of George III became intolerable, the country revolted, yet the old Colonial governments and institutions remained unharmed.
Churches, buisnesses, and colonial assemblies, even colleges, continued their operation according to the old established rules and patterns.
The Continental Congress, initially an advisory ad-hoc delegation, assumed the role of a central government, coordinating and mediating between the old Colonial bodies.
So succesful were both the old structures in maintaing their old role and the new Congress in stepping into the shoes of the Crown (or at least, such shoes as the Americans would have them wear), that they have defeated the British and sought an arrangement that would perpertuate their twin roles. The first arrangement, the Articles of Confederation, had failed to yield results satisfactory to anyone and was soon replaced by the new Constitution, which is largely the same to this day.
The memory of the Revolution produced two lines of interpretation, which in turn lead to the rise of two competing factions traditionally at the center (and the helm) of American politics. Together they create the governing body of the United States and the entirety of the "serious" part of its politically active citizenry. If Jupiter was the Sustainer of the Roman State, in America it is two faced Janus who bears the title stator.
First there is the faction who looks onto the Revolution as the establishing act of a new government and, therefore, wishes to stregthen the American government and to see greater activity on its part in all fields of life. Since, they reason, the establishment of this government was a good, surely this public good should be extended to all fields of American life?
Second is the faction that looks into the Revolution as an act of abolishing the old central authority, the British Crown, and replacing it with that of Congress once the former became abusive to the traditional institutions and governments which it was suppose to coordinate and intermediate between (rather than rule over).
Therefore they are ever suspicious of the central authority of the Federal Government and their main reccomendation is, that it should abstain from intervention with what they view as the province of centrifugal institutions (such as state and local governments, private buisnesses, religious communities and civil societies) and , at most, content itself in the role of a coordinator. Even thatrole, they argue, should be fullfilled by the central authority only for the specific purposes to which its founding document directs it.
The differences between these two factions, in reality, are intricate and subtle. The first does not neccesarily want to convert the actual management of Capital to the hands of the government, as it is satisfied with bringing (what it sees as) the blessing of government to that field by regulation and supervision, without need for the government to take on the complex and cumbersome buisness of managing financial institutions. The second faction is not above voting monies to subsidize such enterprises as they view neccesary as part of the Federal Government's legitimate role as the national coordinator.
There is much agreement between the two faction on the central values all policy should be aimed at: the formula "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" is agreed upon.
The problem is, of course, that their different outlook on the role of the Federal Government causes them to see each other, almost inevtably, as detriments to these three lofty goals. The forst faction believes that it is the government who protect Liberty, Life and the Pursuit of Happiness from petty (and local) tyrants and bigots, the other is more afraid of thetyrants and bigots holding office in the government. This is why the first faction tends to spend a considerable amounts of time discussing the faults of the people and of institutions, such as prejudice, ignorance and bigotry, while the second faction spends equal amounts of time talking about the vices of government - its incompetence, waste, heavy-handedness and tyrannical tendencies.
Comments