The Brothers Austrian

Last night I picked up We Who Dare to Say No to War and turned to a random speech. I ended up being awe struck at the foresight of Vice President Henry A. Wallace. Wallace knew that post WWII America would be turning point. He saw dangers of a growing military industrial complex at about the same time Congressman Ron Paul was born (ironic). The full speech can be found here but I want highlight a few paragraphs and add in what I see as the parrallel’s to where we stand today. The thought experiment sent shivers down my spine.

March 12, 1947 (September 11th), marked a turning point in American history. It is not a Greek (Egyptian) crisis that we face, it is an American crisis. It is a crisis in the American spirit. Only the American people fully aroused and promptly acting can prevent disaster.President Truman (Obama/Bush/Clinton/Bush/Reagan/Carter/Ford/Nixon/LBJ), in the name of democracy and humanitarianism, proposed a military lend-lease program. He proposed a loan of $400,000,000 to Greece and Turkey as a down payment on an unlimited expenditure aimed at opposing Communist (terrorist) expansion. He proposed, in effect, that America police Russia’s (Al Queda) every border. There is no regime too reactionary for us provided it stands in Russia’s (Al Queda) expansionist path. There is no country too remote to serve as the scene of a contest which may widen until it becomes a world war.President Truman calls for action to combat a crisis. What is this crisis that necessitates Truman going to Capitol Hill as though a Pearl Harbor (September 11th) has suddenly hit us? How many more of these Pearl Harbors (September 11th) will there be? How can they be foreseen? What will they cost?

Now I highlighted, underlined and reread this paragraph three times:

I say that this policy is utterly futile. No people can be bought. America cannot afford to spend billions and billions of dollars for unproductive purposes. The world is hungry and insecure, and the peoples of all lands demand change. President Truman (Bush/Obama) cannot prevent change in the world any more than he can prevent the tide from coming in or the sun from setting. But once America stands for opposition to change, we are lost. America will become the most-hated nation in the world.

Two road diverged…And so it goes.

MisesBeliever Government Spending, History, Interventionism, Liberty, Uncategorized, mises.org

I am tired of seeing negative, fear mongering press in regards to Tom Wood’s recent book, Nullification. Here is a recent article posted at the mises.org summerizing his views.

Nullification was successfully used BY THE NORTH, to avoid enforcing the Jefferson’s embargo and (ughh Jefferson….one of your two bad decisions) the Fugitive Slave Acts. As per normal however, society focuses on what the state taught us in its textbooks.

What most people don’t know about nullification is that the states believed they had this power under the Constitution. This fact was used by the Federalists to the opposing anti federalists to enter into a COMPACT, thus creating the United States of America. Kentucky specifically reiterated this view point before Marbury v. Madison (establishing judicial review) with the Kentucky Resolutions which rejected the odious Alien and Sedition Acts (The Pricipals of ’98, audio of history lecture by Tom Woods).

Say the Federal government instituted something like Arizona’s new law that, in my opinion, allows for an unlawful search and seizure on national scale. Nullification would provide the states with recourse.

The classic argument from those in the legal world is that that this is why we have the judicial branch. Really, so what they are telling me is that the states agreed to a binding agreement in which the federal government would be the referee for federal laws? That’s like letting Joe Montana be the booth review official for all Super Bowls. Wait a minute, what if the 49ers are playing in the Super Bowl? Well, what if the legal issue is a states interpretation of the Constitution versus a federal interpretation of the Constitution. Can we really expect a federal branch to relinquish its power and defer to the states?

History shows that the states absolutely believed Nullification was constitutional. In fact Hamilton used this as a point of encouragement to get the states to sign.

I believe that Nullification can be used as a peaceful means to put a true check on Washington.

Please, before jumping to conclusions to about Nullification, read Tom Wood’s book or at least read this article. Perhaps you’ll shed your preconceived notions that were dumped into your head year after year in grade school.

MisesBeliever History, Liberty, mises.org, nullification