ARISTOTLE'S POLITY: THE UNITED STATES AND THE WALLS COME TUMBLING DOWN

When contemplating which political form was best, Aristotle theorized there were at least three possibilities, a monarchy, an aristocracy or a polity.  The polity was a system in which the leadership governed as a vanguard of liberty with the consent of the people.  It was assumed these guardians of society were the elite, those considered the most upright, the most virtuous, the best men.  Their privilege emanated from their wisdom, their principled reputation, their desire to create a just society.  But Aristotle feared this same elite could descend into an oligarchy, a tyranny, leading and directing a mob, absconding with the political liberty which had been bestowed upon them by the people.  These oligarchs would rule in the name of the people but the substance of their governance would be tyrannical.  But great thinkers' ideas are universal, applied to all settings at all times and in the contemporary era, in the great modern republic the United States, such tyrannical schemes are manifesting themselves through various means and institutions.  This new tyrannical grouping would be a self-appointed narcissistic clique who may have attended the most prestigious schools, or be self-proclaimed experts of a given field or those who had the greatest wealth or power.  When looking at the landscape of America, one can see the manifestation of such a phenomenon in at least 3 areas. 

First, the elite universities and colleges are hotbeds of opposition to the American system and the traditional ways of the West.  During the spring and summer of 2024 coordinated demonstrations supporting Hamas and its genocidal struggle to destroy the state of Israel sprung up at these institutions.  Demonstrators sided with Hamas, even though the group’s ideology embodies overt antisemitism which includes the destruction of Israel and praise of 10-7.  But the protests went beyond the mere questioning of the Jewish state, it also protested against any so-called settler states which includes the United States.  Feckless administrators who may be actual silent supporters of the demonstrators allowed protesters to disrupt campus life, destroy private property, and intimidate Jewish students and their supporters.  How can a republic maintain its liberty and sovereignty if its future leaders seek the destruction of the very same edifice of governing? 

Next has been the formation of the administrative state (bureaucracy) which creates rules and regulations which obfuscates the constitutional order and undermines the people’s will.  In the contemporary period, the vast number of laws passed are not through the legislative branch , the Congress but through the bureaucratic apparatchik. For example, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has created regulations which significantly reduce  the number of gas powered automobiles and gas stations by the year 2032.  On this issue of great importance, there was an absence in Congress of great speeches, great debates defending or promoting a particular point of view, policy or legislation.  Instead, a small clique of extremists/activists in the form of government bureaucrats have overturned the legislative process by issuing edicts without the approval of the people.  These fanatics through bureaucratic fiat are transforming the economy, altering people’s lives, reducing our standard of living all the while citing that they are saving the planet from destruction even though this hysteria has been gaslighted for decades. How can a republic maintain the liberty and sovereignty of the people if the administrative state is empowered to legislate without being responsible to the people and the constitutional order?

Finally, the traditional mass media no longer plays its role as the watchdog of government and supporter of constitutional order and liberty.  The Framers of the Constitution designed  freedom of the press as a means to check the power of the government and ensure that it was operating within the constitutional framework.  Instead, the media today has its own agenda which competes with that of the people ensuring it no longer serves as a bulwark against corruption in government.  Case in point, the Hunter Biden laptop fiasco.  Hunter Biden’s laptop contained significant incriminating evidence against the Biden family but with much prodding, Biden campaign official and current Secretary of State Antony Blinken was able to get 51 former intelligence agents to sign off that this laptop “had all the earmarks of Russian disinformation. “ Did the press follow this assertion and test whether it was fallacious? Such a hypothesis did not seem to cross their collective mind.  Did the press ever indicate any interest in the contents of the laptop?  Not at all.  It was after all Russian disinformation!  Once it became apparent the laptop was genuine, did the press question the ethics and motivation of the 51?  Was there a price to pay by the 51 for essentially conducting authentic election interference?  Not to this day. On the contrary, the story is now reported as old news and not really a concern. Instead, the mainstream media was advocating for Joe Biden and no matter the price, no matter the evidence, the press was abdicating its constitutional responsibility to the people to ensure Joe Biden was elected President.  Its objective came to fruition but the question beckons. How can a republic be guaranteed when the press, the pillar against corruption, has joined forces with a political entity/party and given up its role as a check against the leviathan power of the state?