Leviathan: On Monarchs, Mandates, and the Mainstream Media

"They that are discontented under monarchy call it tyranny, and they that are displeased with aristocracy call it oligarchy; so also, they which find themselves grieved under a democracy call it anarchy."
~Thomas Hobbes

In the 17th century, the English philosopher Thomas Hobbes wrote of the rule of law and defended absolute monarchy while alluding to the Biblical sea-monster known as the leviathan. Hobbes' analogy regarding political leadership brings to mind the quote from Friedrich Nietzsche: "Take care when you fight with monsters that you do not become one in the process -- and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss also gazes into you." Shall we gaze into the abyss?

Graham Summers of Phoenix Capital Research had an excellent piece published on Zero Hedge recently discussed one of the underlying problems of the current economic environment: a lack of trust. Summers: "Of [the basic principles of democratic capitalism], one stands out as being absolutely vital in order for business to thrive. That principle is the principle of trust. Without trust, democratic capitalism cannot function." Summers discussed how the element of trust is necessary for functional commerce, e.g., trust that a business is legitimate, trust that product is what it purports to be, trust that the government will enforce the laws of the land.

Summers noted that in light of the 2008 financial crisis, trust in the marketplace has been damaged. In light of bailouts and crony capitalism, the formidability and viability of free-market capitalism has been put to the test. That being the case, Summers discussed "that this country has been in a perpetual state of collapse and renewal ever since commerce began in this country." Booms and busts are inherent in the democratic capitalist structure. Failing businesses give way to better businesses in the spirit of creative destruction. Thus, Summers argued that the reestablishment of trust is essential to a genuine, solid recovery. Summers: "In the US, we ... chose to undermine capitalism and the economic cycle. In the process we've undermined trust in the system. Until this is remedied there will [not be] real recovery."

The issue of trust is starting to become a serious sticking point in society and the marketplace. As I have written previously, some conservative commentators have voiced concern regarding the awaited decision from the Supreme Court on ObamaCare. And as Rush Limbaugh has discussed, the Supreme Court relies on credibility. That being the case, whereas some have criticized Justice Elena Kagan for having not recused herself, the Drudge Report recently linked to a story discussing how Justice Breyer "'promised' that he had not read the entirety of the 2,700-page health-care legislation the court was examining." Further, "it would be unreasonable for the lawyers arguing over the constitutionality of the law to expect the justices to 'spend a year reading all this' to determine which parts of it should be allowed to stand if the court decides to strike [the individual mandate] down as unconstitutional". The story also mentioned then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's famous quote: "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it."

I mean, it could just be me, but doesn't it strike anyone else as odd that such an important piece of legislation -- overhauling the nation's health care system and mandating that citizens engage in contracts -- would not be read in full by the actual lawmakers passing the law and also the judges determining whether or not the law is constitutional? Maybe it's just me, but that doesn't sound right. That sounds a bit like attesting that Ayn Rand's "The Fountainhead" is a great, entertaining, and thought-provoking novel while never having read it and not being really too sure what the novel's about. It's interesting to note that a recent article from NPR suggested that the recent ideological squabble over the individual mandate may have been a partisan sham -- and that's not even getting into the idea that the Supreme Court embraced the argument against the individual mandate that Obama made against Hillary Clinton in 2008. Odd. In light of Obama's prior argument, with rising food and fuel costs, how can consumers be expected to purchase health insurance if there is an individual mandate?

Questions regarding our justice system and our legislative system have also been raised owing to current events on the national stage. Per Sean Hannity's sentiments on the aftermath of the shooting of Trayvon Martin: "A bounty? Where is [Attorney General] Eric Holder?" And that's not even getting into issues like illegal immigration and Operation Fast and Furious.

This line of discussion also leads into questions regarding allegations of disinformation in the mainstream media. Commenting on NBC's alleged misrepresentations on a report regarding George Zimmerman's 911 call, the Media Research Center's Brent Bozell called NBC News' reporting distortion "despicable" and an "all-out falsehood". In response, NBC has issued a statement: "We have launched an internal investigation into the editorial process surrounding this particular story."

Commenting on misinformation and bias that has unfortunately become commonplace in the American mainstream media, a recent article from RT discussed that "plummeting ratings for mainstream media news networks mean one thing -- American viewers have had enough and are switching off." RT: "To Iran, to Libya, to Syria -- the Western mainstream media seems to have lost the desire to critically assess information... self-imposing censorship." The article from RT suggested that problems with the mainstream media have "created an information black-out -- with a major chunk of the story unavailable to viewers, what is shown being of questionable value." The American mainstream media is thus "creating entertainment, instead of journalism." RT: "All this [leaves] the American viewer poorly served by the mainstream media... The self-imposed censorship will remain on American TV screens, while the truth is kept further away."

Speaking of health care mandates and the mainstream media's influence on political issues, NPR had a interesting article recently from the Associated Press on GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney and how (while the Romney campaign is looking forward to the fall campaign against Pres. Obama) doubts still linger among conservatives. Whereas Romney has been "tagged by opponents as rich and detached", the former Massachusetts governor is on track to secure the Republican nomination. That being said, "cultural conservatives have struggled to embrace Romney."

In my previous discussion regarding political leadership in the US, I mentioned how "the prospect of Mitt Romney's being the Republican nominee only complicates matters." To be more specific, I think in light of lower voter turnout and political apathy, the November general election could very well leave a significant portion of America feeling estranged with a lack of societal direction. Are we to believe that what is being called the most important election of our time may be met with an apathetic electorate and low voter turnout?

The real societal crux here goes back to issues of political polarization, conservatives' growing discontent with Obama's policies, and lackluster support of Romney. Romney's reputation with RomneyCare does not help the situation. Given the choice of Pres. Obama and a Massachusetts moderate who supported a health care overhaul similar to ObamaCare, it would appear that conservatives are stuck between a rock and a hard place -- and on a societal level, maybe this isn't such a good thing; maybe ideologically alienating a major portion of the electorate is not such a good idea. (It's as if the US could use a political party like Venstre in Denmark.) Going along with my previous discussion that could be considered an homage to Hobbes, given the political polarization in the US, I would not be surprised if many Americans were to begin looking north toward Canada following the 2012 election. Can you say, "God save the Queen"?

Speaking of world leaders, Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner's Freakonomics blog had an interesting post on March 30, 2012 discussing the idea that America is a "training ground for dictators". The blog post cited a recent article from Foreign Policy discussing various coup plotters that were trained in the US. Such discussion leads us back to Hobbes and the idea that society is maintained by the rule of force as citizens are part of a social contract with a sovereign leader -- alluding to the the idea of a king or ruler being like a leviathan -- that a strong central government ruled by a king equates to peace in society. Hobbes: "Kings, whose power is greatest, turn their endeavors to the assuring of it at home by laws, or abroad by wars."

Aye, so it appears that we have come full circle. Nevertheless, even with monsters and monarchs, this too shall pass. As we make our way toward what could be a very long, hot summer, now would probably be a good time for us to remember that to every thing there is a season...yes, to every thing there is a season.

"In a democracy, the whole assembly cannot fail unless the multitude that are to be governed fail."
~Thomas Hobbes