From the Writings of John Adams

This post is not my work. It is from the Diary of John Adams. My purpose in posting it in this fashion lies purely in my selfish desire to further communicate of a small nugget of a most eloquent and profound wisdom. I've modernized the spelling and removed John Adams' cross outs to make the reading easier but other than that it is as represented in his own handwriting which you can find at this link.

I will not comment further other than to say that Adams, in this writing, has most certainly cut through the situation in politics today; as well as across the vast expanse of time. We would be wise to check our premises according to the standards below before casting our support to anybody whom we would give our power to.

"1772. FEB. 9. SUNDAY.

"'If I would but go to Hell for an eternal Moment or so, I might be knighted.' — Shakespeare.

"Shakespeare, that great Master of every Affection of the Heart and every Sentiment of the Mind as well as of all the Powers of Expression, is sometimes fond of a certain pointed Oddity of Language, a certain Quaintness of Style, that is an Imperfection, in his Character. The Motto prefixed to this Paper, may be considered as an Example to illustrate this Observation.

"Abstracted from the Point and Conceit in the Style, there is Sentiment enough in these few Words to fill a Volume. It is a striking Representation of that Struggle which I believe always happens, between Virtue and Ambition, when a Man first commences a Courtier. By a Courtier I mean one who applies himself to the Passions and Prejudices, the Follies and Vices of great Men in order to obtain their Smiles, Esteem and Patronage and consequently their favors and Preferments. Human Nature, depraved as it is, has interwoven in its very Frame, a Love of Truth, Sincerity, and Integrity, which must be overcome by Art, Education, and habit, before the Man can become entirely ductile to the Will of a dishonest Master. When such a Master requires of all who seek his favor, an implicit Resignation to his Will and Humor, and these require that he be soothed, flattered and assisted in his Vices, and Follies, perhaps the blackest Crimes, that Men can commit, the first Thought of this will produce in a Mind not yet entirely debauched, a Soliloquy, something like my Motto — as if he should say — The Minister of State or the Governor would promote my Interest, would advance me to Places of Honor and Profit, would raise me to Titles and Dignities that will be perpetuated in my family, in a Word would make the Fortune of me and my Posterity forever, if I would but comply with his Desires and become his Instrument to promote his Measures. — But still I dread the Consequences. He requires of me, such Compliances, such horrid Crimes, such a Sacrifice of my Honor, my Conscience, my Friends, my Country, my God, as the Scriptures inform us must be punished with nothing less than Hell Fire, eternal Torment. And this is so unequal a Price to pay for the Honors and Emoluments in the Power of a Minister or Governor, that I cannot prevail upon myself to think of it. The Duration of future Punishment terrifies me. If I could but deceive myself so far as to think Eternity a Moment only, I could comply, and be promoted.

"Such as these are probably the Sentiments of a Mind as yet pure, and undefiled in its Morals. And many and severe are the Pangs, and Agonies it must undergo, before it will be brought to yield entirely to Temptation. Notwithstanding this, We see every Day, that our Imaginations are so strong and our Reason so weak, the Charms of Wealth and Power are so enchanting, and the Belief of future Punishments so faint, that Men find Ways to persuade themselves, to believe any Absurdity, to submit to any Prostitution, rather than forego their Wishes and Desires. Their Reason becomes at last an eloquent Advocate on the Side of their Passions, and they bring themselves to believe that black is white, that Vice is Virtue, that Folly is Wisdom and Eternity a Moment."

The Anti-Liberal Techniques: Part 9, Compromise and Insanity

It frequently comes up in the discussion of politics that one party accuses the other of being stubborn and unwilling to compromise. I'm quite sick of it. I think if I ever come face to face with a politician, particularly a Republican, who says to me, "Brett, I can reach across the aisle and work with them to get things done," I would likely lose control and punch the son-of-a-bitch right in the face. Yes, in the next three seconds I would find myself face down on the ground in handcuffs. Yes, it would be expensive and I would very likely spend several years in jail. But it would give me the opening at the trial of saying to the accusing politician that he is obviously incapable of working out a compromise with someone who wants to punch him in his face; and thus, I would be taking, so to speak, one for the team.

The lesson, if you will, is that there are two types of compromise. There are times where a compromise is for the benefit of the People. There are times when compromising works to the detriment of the people.

I admire the tendency and tenacity of any person to try to get along and work things out. It is a mark of honest and earnest civility to do so. But you cannot compromise with evil and ever have it work out to be a good thing.

Let's say that you are selling me a car. You want ten thousand for it. I think it's only worth eight thousand. We compromise and I buy the car for nine thousand. This is a good and fair compromise because we have willingly agreed and both benefited from the deal.

Let's use, to provide a contrast, an example where I have expressed my desire to kick you in the shin. Let's say that I want to kick you ten times. You want to not be kicked at all. There is no sane compromise possible. Any so-called  compromise would result in your personal injury and I'd kind of think of you as a nut job to accept any kicking at all.

Now let's take that concept into politics. I voted for George W. Bush (and other Republicans) because he said he was going to reduce the debt, reduce the deficit and reduce the size of the federal government. Let's say that the position to be compromised with, as an arbitrary figure for the sake of discussion here, would be a reduction of all of these things by twenty percent. A valid compromise with the Democrats would have been to reduce them by ten percent, or anything resulting in a demonstrably smaller deficit, debt and government. Instead the size of the government increased by forty-seven percent under his "leadership." And the debt and deficit increased correspondingly. This is not a compromise. This is an acceptance of insanity. This is being sold down the river. This is a knife in the back betrayal at its worst and incompetence at best.

Even if you tried to make the case that the Democrats wanted to increase the size of the government by three hundred percent (just to pick a wild number, because we all know that every "self respecting" Democrat would really want to increase the government by a thousand percent) and "W" negotiated or "compromised" them down to just forty-seven percent, it still works out to be a horrible abomination of a deal for us limited government/maximum freedom types of people. This is not a compromise and to accept it or justify it or agree with it in any capacity, as a limited government supporter, is analogous to being complicit with insanity.

Taking the above argument to the Constitution, Article Four states specifically; "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land;" [emphasis mine]. It also says; "The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this Constitution;" [emphasis mine].

It does not say that they shall be bound to it except for the times when for political convenience, and for the sake of their reelection and maintenance of political power, they can throw out the Constitution and do any damn thing they want and call it "compromise" to make it sound amenable and good.

THE CONSTITUTION IS THE LAW!!!! PERIOD. It is the equivalent of the Ten Commandments in Christianity. If someone wants to murder a hundred people just to amuse himself you don't compromise with that and let him kill only fifty. The Soviet Union wanted to take over America. We don't compromise with them and give them twenty-five states. Any compromise with the Constitution, whether it is to add something to it or subtract something from it, is a violation of the law.

Compromise is where the end result is beneficial to all who are involved. Anything else in the field of American politics, is simply negotiating with criminal insanity to the effect of selling out our freedom for the gain of personal political power.



Follow the links below for the rest of the series:

The Anti-Liberal Techniques: Part One

The Anti-Liberal Techniques: Part Two

The Anti-Liberal Techniques: Part Three

The Anti-Liberal Techniques: Part Four

The Anti-Liberal Techniques: Part Five

The Anti-Liberal Techniques: Part Six

The Anti-Liberal Techniques: Part Seven

The Anti-Liberal Techniques: Part Eight

The Anti-Liberal Techniques: Part Nine