Now that the U.S. presidential campaign is over, Andrew P. Napolitano has questions.
Vote Here sign in St Paul, Minnesota, 2018. (Laurie
What if you were allowed to vote only because it didn’t make a difference? What if no matter how you voted, the elites always got their way? What if the concept of one person/one vote was just a fiction created by the government to induce your compliance?
What if democracy as it has come to exist in America today is dangerous to personal freedom? What if our so-called democracy erodes the people’s understanding of natural rights and the reasons for government and instead turns political campaigns into beauty contests?
What if American democracy allows the government to do anything it wants, as long as more people vote for government than vote to reject it? What if there is no effective moral way to reject it?
What if the purpose of contemporary democracy has been to convince people that they can prosper not through the voluntary creation of wealth but through theft from others? What if the only moral way to acquire wealth is through voluntary economic activity? What if the government persuaded the people that they could acquire wealth through political activity?
What if voluntary economic activity includes all the productive and peaceful things we choose to do? What if political activity includes all the parasitical and destructive things the government does? What if the government has never created wealth? What if everything the government owns it has taken by threats of force?
What if governments were originally established to protect people’s freedoms but always turn into political and imperialist enterprises that seek to expand their power, increase their territory and heighten their control of the population?
What if the idea that we need a government to take care of us is a fiction perpetrated to increase the size of government? What if our strength as individuals and durability as a culture are contingent not on the strength of the government but on the amount of freedom we have from the government?
Former President Donald Trump addressing a rally in Glendale, Arizona, on Aug. 23. (Gage Skidmore, Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0)
What if the fatal cocktail of big government and democracy ultimately produces dependency? What if so-called democratic government, once it grows to a certain size, begins to soften and weaken the people? What if big government destroys people’s motivations and democracy convinces them that the only motivation they need is to vote and go along with the results?
What if Congress always votes to expand the size of government, increase the government’s debt, keep the government’s secrets and dispatch the military to kill innocents abroad, no matter which party controls it?
What if Congress keeps secrets from the people who elected it? What if congressional elections don’t square with congressional legislation because what counts are the secret government meetings that come after the elections? What if the deep state — the law enforcement/surveillance/military/arms and drug manufacturers/banking and regulatory structures — remains in place no matter who is in the White House or which political party controls Congress?
What if the problem with democracy is that the majority thinks it can right any wrong, write any law, tax any event, regulate any behavior, intrude upon any process and acquire any asset it wants?
What if the greatest tyrant in history lives among us? What if that tyrant always gets its way, no matter what the laws are or what the Constitution says? What if that tyrant is the majority of voters? What if the majority in a democracy recognizes no limits on its power?
Kamala Harris on stage and video at the Democratic National Convention, Aug. 22, in Chicago. (Lorie Shaull, Flickr, CC BY 2.0)
What if the government misinforms voters so they will justify anything the government wants to do? What if the government bribes people with the money it prints? What if it gives entitlements to the poor and tax breaks to the middle class and bailouts to the rich and bribes to the states just to keep everyone dependent on it?
What if the government doesn’t work for us? What if we work for the government?
What if a vibrant republic requires not just the democratic process of voting, but also informed and engaged voters who understand first principles of human existence, including the divine origin and inalienable individual possession of natural rights?
What if we could free ourselves from the yoke of big government through a return to first principles? What if establishment elites don’t want this? What if the elites who control government recognize no restraints on their powers? What if the system is crafted so government power can only grow — and never shrink?
What if Congress remains the same no matter who wins elections? What if we have only one political party — the Big Government Party — and it has a Democratic wing and a Republican wing? What if both wings want war and taxes and welfare and debt and perpetual government growth, but offer only slightly different menus on how to achieve them? What if the Big Government Party enacted laws to make it impossible for meaningful political competition to thrive?
What if the late Yale history professor Edmund S. Morgan was right when he said that government depends on make-believe? What if our ancestors made believe that the king was divine? What if they made believe that he could do no wrong? What if they made believe that the voice of the king was the voice of God?
What if the government believes in make-believe? What if it makes believe that the people have a voice? What if it makes believe that the representatives of the people are the people? What if it makes believe that the governors are the servants of the people? What if it makes believe that all persons are created equal, or that they are not?
What if the government makes believe that it is always right? What if it makes believe that the majority can do no wrong? What if the tyranny of the majority is as destructive to human freedom as the tyranny of a madman? What if the government knows this?
Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, was the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel and hosts the podcast Judging Freedom. Judge Napolitano has written seven books on the U.S. Constitution. The most recent is Suicide Pact: The Radical Expansion of Presidential Powers and the Lethal Threat to American Liberty. To learn more about Judge Andrew Napolitano, go here.
Published by permission of the author.
COPYRIGHT 2024 ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO
DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM
The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of Consortium News.
I consider myself to be a Deist. I.e. I strongly lean toward believing in God or a Higher Intelligence, a Creator, but accept uncertainty. I would consider myself to be between 2 and 3 on Richard Dawkins’ scale of belief, where 1 = strong theist and 7 = strong atheist. However I do not believe any alleged revelation from God, such as the Bible or Koran, to actually be such.
I used to be a Christian and have reasons for no longer being one. And I also have problems with atheism. In particular I have problems with believing or accepting that our reasoning ability and our critical facilities, and in particular our sense of “soul” or “spirit”, and our sense of right and wrong, and of justice, are only a product of entirely blind natural processes.
I give a detailed account of my beliefs and convictions, and the development of my beliefs and convictions, in my write-up linked to by my screen handle. I very strongly think that the process involved in one arriving at one’s beliefs and convictions is just as important as one’s beliefs and convictions themselves.
If God, in the commonly understood sense of the word, is really real (and I accept that this is an “if”), then I consider that our reasoning ability and our critical facilities, along with life itself, are gifts to us from God, or from the Supreme Intelligence. (Our critical facilities include our feelings and emotions, and our awareness of these, and our sense of right and wrong, and of justice, as well as our ability to reason and think logically.) And one honors (or “glorifies”) God by using and applying these gifts. (And certainly much more so than by cringing servile fear of God as though God is some kind of easily offended cosmic tyrant!)
It should be noted that many of the American founders, including Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, and George Washington, were Deists, and that the Declaration of Independence, of which Jefferson was a principal author, is a Deistic document. The Declaration says
That is admittedly a statement of religious belief or “faith”; however the Creator referred to here is not the God of the Bible or the God of any “revealed” religion. Elsewhere the Declaration refers to the “Laws of Nature” and “Nature’s God”.
See the article at hxxps://www.deism.com/post/the-deistic-roots-of-the-united-state-of-america
All that being said, it is also true that as far as society is concerned it is vitally important that each person has the absolute right and freedom to arrive at his or her own religious beliefs and convictions, whether these lead to a belief in any kind of God (or gods, plural), or no God. (I myself personally am unhappy at the thought of atheism, but if somebody else is an atheist, and is happy with being such, and is a good and moral person, then that person being an atheist is no concern of mine.)
Thomas Jefferson said
See at hxxps://www.au.org/thomas-jefferson/ (scroll down)
Absolute religious freedom and separation of church and state are vital principles embodied in the First Amendment. The American founders, who were keen students of history, were well aware of the situation in Europe, where hundreds of years of church-state union had led to violence, terror, torture and war, including the Inquisition, and including the Thirty Years War from 1618 to 1648 in Central Europe. And state-imposed atheism in the former Soviet Union was also just as tyrannical as state-imposed religion.
And of course we should all know about the very serious threat to religious freedom posed by Project 2025, which we need to be concerned about especially now with Donald Trump having just been elected.
Voting has become a mirage (and not just in the US)…to make people believe they live in a democracy. The will of the people has been usurped VERY LONG TIME AGO…by the oligarchy. Real democracy takes place every single day…not just at election day. What is needed is a world-wide social revolution…with guillotines and all.
Unfortunately, you are right!!!! Voting is pointless. But the thing is your movement would have to be somewhat secretive to avoid being totally infiltrated. You will need a ton of $$$$ as well. Once money is digitized, game over.
What if we revisit the Communications Act of 1996 and reinstate media ownership limits to get private control back from corporate control? What if we reinstate the Fairness Doctrine? What if Presidential Debates were broadcast on PBS and the League of Women Voters host the event? What if candidates actually debated policy questions posed by real journalists? What if we outlaw advertising firms from marketing candidates to us like any other commercial product? What if bribing public officials was prosecuted by law enforcement? What if public office holders were audited when they took office and audited when they left office? What if we had truth in advertising? I could go on and on, but you get my drift.
I totally agree with you on all points, but will those in power? I highly doubt it. Voting is just a big scam anymore that gives the government legitimacy.
Direct democracy is the answer. Yet, representative democracies have become so reified, we forget that direct democracy is the only real democracy, and representative democracy a massive theft of all our political powers. We’re left with voting for kings. What a waste of human potential.
Why does anyone think “another party” might resolve these issues? Is it reasonable to expect a different outcome when representative government is so inherently corrupt? We’ve been trained to willingly accept rejection from George Carlin’s notorious “club.” However, the technological marvels of our time can now provide a true government of the people, without having to suffer generations of catastrophic failures and endless delusions about “another party.” If third parties and coalitions have failed to create true democracy in Europe, why would they work here? Online *irect *emocracy is a possible solution and absolutely no one talks about it. It would be an *nline *overnment run completely by refere*dum voting on every issue. There are probably a lot of smart young people in America with a garage in which they could invent a system for such a true democracy. Otherwise, it looks like nuclear winter and the way of T Rex for us all.
Why does anyone think “another party” might resolve these issues? Is it reasonable to expect a different outcome when representative government is so inherently corrupt? We’ve been trained to willingly accept rejection from George Carlin’s notorious “club.” However, the technological marvels of our time can now provide a true government of the people, without having to suffer generations of catastrophic failures and endless delusions about “another party.” If third parties and coalitions have failed to create true democracy in Europe, why would they work here? Online Direct Democracy is a possible solution and absolutely no one talks about it. It would be an online government run completely by referendum voting on every issue. There are probably a lot of smart young people in America with a garage in which they could invent a true democracy. Otherwise, it looks like nuclear winter and the way of T Rex for us all.
We need to organize working-class communities we are a part of — Black, queer, our workplaces, schools, churches and prisons. Independent organizing free of the Democrats or Republicans.
Kamala never spoke to many people’s most important issue, ending U.S. funding for the Israel settler colonial state. Why did progressives do so much work for someone who didn’t care about our issues or working-class people? If we put that energy into organizing our communities/co-workers/neighbors into organizations that were not controlled by the 1% and their foundations and front organizations, our communities would be stronger.
What if Trump had made that remark about appointing Pompeo or Cotton as Secretary of Defense BEFORE the election? Kamala Harris would be the one sworn in as president come January 20th is what! I thought that Trump said he wanted a more peaceful foreign policy, not certain Armageddon. Why immediately threaten to create your new government from the leftover warmongering Neocons that were such a catastrophe the first time round? What madness, Donald. Please stop by Genocide Joe’s neurologist before taking the oath of office.
The neocons and Trump have the same goal, to maximize wealth for the 1%, and those megaprofits require war. It’s b.s. Trump didn’t have any wars, he just funded foreign mercenaries to fight instead of Americans. Syria continued the refugee crisis that the NATO/U.S. attack on Libya started, and that Trump made that happen by trying to do regime change in Syria so he could move on the doing it in Iran–thus stealing the world’s oil by installing compliant regimes.
Yes, if Trump stopped wasting our tax dollars on war we would have billions for Americans & this country would be transformed. But as war is how the 1% increases its wealth, not peace, Donald will never do it.
Kamala would not have won period. She was shoved into running without having to articulate what she stood for (aside from her fatuous and 100% tone deafness to our roiling problems). Meaning she did not have to prove her mettle to us on a stage of competitors. At an Open Convention. The Democratic National committee held and holds responsibility for the fiasco of a lousy and manufactured candidate. Just as it was responsible for cancelling our choice of Bernie to instead install Genocide Delaware Credit Card Banks’ & AIPAC’s boy Biden. It must be dissolved and replaced by a democratic body.
And what if “we the people” decided to put those in power who give a damn …
…what if one does 6 decades, Poly-Sci / Economics and concludes truth spoken by our good judge Napolitano…?
I agree with Judge Nap. Like many in mainstream/corporate/state run (FCC) media who left that environment as a matter of conscience, I applaud what he does now. Judging Freedom is one of the better sites on you tube in the independent media category.
But still, you tube can and will kick anyone off its platform if it strays too much into deeper truths some may call secrets, corporate or state and then they need a Rumble channel.
Censorship and propaganda are so embedded in the minds of Americans and other westerners that at this point, I’m unsure the majority of people will even be able to awaken from their long slumber and once again be able to see that up is up and down is down since presently, it seems more and more like Bizarro World. We need all the Judge Nap’s, Grayzones, Dialogue Works etc. we can get to have any chance at all.
As for the sleeping populace entranced by its presumed father savior -,sudden epiphanies will occur about the wisdom of their adulation the first time a climate induced fire and or flood dashes everything to smithereens and gosh, no FEMA no dough no rescue. God – theirs- dissolved such unnecessary organs of the administrative state.
With the news today that Mike Pompeo and Tom Cotton are both top contenders for President-elect Trump’s future Secretary of Defense, I feel especially receptive to this essay. There was never a point in this election where the voter had the opportunity to make a meaningful choice on what the next four years of US foreign policy should be. Harris was chosen by the party machine and would have represented smooth continuity with the policy of the Biden admin. Trump campaigned on withdrawing support from Ukraine and from the NATO imperial project, but now it seems possible that his policy could be just as undifferentiated as Harris’. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
Right. So time to invest yourself in the gradual building of a political force outside the Business party with its Republican Trumpvance cult and its corporatized Democratic war Party flank.
What if indeed most of these are true, as seems frighteningly plausible, right now? Then we have tyranny. Imposed by the infallible majority. That is, the Tyranny of the Majority. Always the weak spot in arguments for democracy.
As long as voting is criticized only as it does not come up with the desired result, it is nothing but hypocrisy, and will be couinter productive…
Asking “What if?” Is not simple criticism — it is asking folk to be responsible.
Keep writing, Judge.
What if this is a rather hopeless mish-mash of reactionary and progressive talking points?
What if the core cause of all the problems facing the majority of people on Earth including our possible extinction (not mentioned) due to destruction of the environment and / or global thermonuclear war…..is (uh-oh) CAPITALISM???? Also not mentioned.
What if it’s the CAPITALIST elites who run, control and dictate the policies of the government that are the real problem, not the existence of the government or it’s size?
What if there is no god or “divinity” all, therefore no “divine origin and inalienable individual possession of natural rights?” What if rights exist because we decide they do?
What if the issue before us is that the 99% of us who exist here are ruled, dominated and controlled by the CAPITALISTS (1%) whose interest and very existence depend on our NOT having rights?
What if JFK was right when he said that our problems are caused by man (of course today he would say people) and can be solved by man?
…see – here…
…see – here…(again)
Mr Coleman! Excellent penetrating questions. Thank you.
Thank you, you are very kind.
If they’re “inalienable”, HOW COME WE AIN’T GOT ‘EM !?!
Also, should be “What if there is no god or “divinity” AT all”
Oh, thank goodness!
The longer I read Napolitano, the more I was saying: No, thank you, Mr Libertarian!
A lot of “private wealth” has always been created by manipulating government politics. It’s not that we need less government, we need better governance considering the needs of ALL of us.
That’s not a question, btw. I find rhetorical questions only to be a manipulative statements.
Precisely. The judge avoids blaming capitalism in every post. We don’t have a government in the traditional meaning of the word. It has been captured by the corporate/banking class to be used expressly for the purpose of making money from money and the commodification of nature. If not dismantled, this imperialist system will devour the natural world and the diverse life that rely on it to survive. The CORPORATE state must be demolished or we are doomed.
Ok. There are no divine rights. There are no inalienable rights. There are only privileges – from power. And the way it’s distributed. THERE IS ALWAYS GOVERNMENT. THERE IS ALWAYS POWER. ECONOMIC AND MILITARY – Stop with the nonsense that if you get rid of government, things will work out fine. That’s actually what we have now. The way people have worked things out. not so great. If the people’s voice isn’t silenced by power MONEY and FORCE they often want many of the same things. the hierarchy of needs.
If you like the idea of things going private here you go. Privatize the corporations. The banks. the government. Have them all owned by all the private citizens of the country. we’re all owners. one private citizen – one vote . Yup. Nationalize the Fed. All the corporations are cooperatives.
Tell Edmund S. Morgan that it’s not make believe. But there is a lot of lying – the results we see in human suffering.
Soooo be specific. using words that can mean anything – government, tyranny of the majority – is a form of what Morgan is talking about. Those words are fantasies if not unpacked. they are just emotional triggers that can mean whatever. the word liberal – co-opted. same with authoritarian.
Offer real specific policies not platitudes, Judge.
Share the wealth for the national health. And, oh yeah, nature bats last. If we’re to stupid, she’ll simply broom us. Looks likely, don’t you think?
So, the ‘right’, represented by this judge, is what, about a century behind the left in its ability to think and analyze?
“If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal”.
— Emma Goldman, a Russian/Lithuanian born in the 19th century and a leading anarchist/socialist organizer and writer. Ms. Goldman was deported from America by the Democrats for her activities by the Woodrow Wilson administration as a part of its big “Red Scare” campaign and the “Palmer Raids”. So, I’m not sure when she said this, but it was over a century ago.
“Same as it ever was. Same as it ever was. Same as it ever was. Same as it ever was.” –Talking Heads.
The opposition on the right is quite strange at times, because since they reject all previous dissident thought they are always struggling to reinvent the wheel. Of course, given his late start, I really don’t expect the good judge to advance to the level of “If I can’t dance, its not my revolution.”