‘On the Nature of Politics’

March 10, 2013March 10, 2013 / gouverneurmorris / Leave a comment

Here follows some powerful excerpts from an essay Calvin Coolidge wrote as a state legislator. The piece is printed in his first collection of speeches entitled, “Have Faith in Massachusetts” 2nd ed. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1919, pp.69-84.

“Politics is not an end, but a means. It is not a product, but a process. It is the art of government. Like other values it has its counterfeits. So much emphasis has been put upon the false that the significance of the true has been obscured and politics has come to convey the meaning of crafty and cunning selfishness, instead of candid and sincere service. The Greek derivation shows the nobler purpose. Politikos means city-rearing, state-craft. And when we remember that city also meant civilization, the spurious presentment, mean and sordid, drops away and the real figure of the politician, dignified and honorable, a minister to civilization, author and finisher of government, is revealed in its true and dignified proportions…

“…Public men must expect criticism and be prepared to endure false charges from their opponents. It is a matter of no great concern to them. But public confidence in government is a matter of great concern. It cannot be maintained in the face of such opinions as I have mentioned. It is necessary to differentiate between partisan assertions and actual conditions. It is necessary to recognize worth as well as to condemn graft. No system of government can stand that lacks public confidence and no progress can be made on the assumption of a false premise…

“…The first care of despotism seems to be to control the school and the press. Where the mind is free it turns not to force but to reason for the source of authority. Men submit to a government of force as we are doing now when they believe it is necessary for their security, necessary to protect them from the imposition of force from without…

“…This leads to the larger and all important field of politics. Here we soon see that office-holding is the incidental, but the standard of citizenship is the essential. Government does rest upon the opinions of men. Its results rest on their actions. This makes every man a politician whether he will or no. This lays the burden on us all. Men who have had the advantages of liberal culture ought to be the leaders in maintaining the standards of citizenship. Unless they can and do accomplish this result education is a failure. Greatly have they been taught, greatly must they teach. The power to think is the most practical thing in the world. It is not and cannot be cloistered from politics.

“We live under a republican form of government. We need forever to remember that representative government does represent. A careless, indifferent representative is the result of a careless, indifferent electorate. The people who start to elect a man to get what he can for his district will probably find they have elected a man who will get what he can for himself. A body will keep on its course for a time after the moving impulse ceases by reason of its momentum. The men who founded our government had fought and thought mightily on the relationship of man to his government. Our institutions would go for a time under the momentum they gave. But we should be deluded if we supposed they can be maintained without more of the same stern sacrifice offered in perpetuity. Government is not an edifice that the founders turn over to posterity all completed. It is an institution, like a university which fails unless the process of education continues.

“The State is not founded on selfishness. it cannot maintain itself by the offer of material rewards. It is the opportunity for service. There has of late been held out the hope that government could by legislation remove from the individual the need of effort. The managers of industries have seemed to think that their difficulties could be removed and prosperity ensures by changing the laws. The employee has been led to believe that his condition could be made easy by the same method. When industries can be carried on without any struggle, their results will be worthless, and when wages can be secured without any effort they have no purchasing value. In the end the value of the product will be measured by the amount of effort necessary to secure it…”

Quoting the profound philosopher, Dr. Charles Garman, he continues,

” ‘Critics have noticed three stages in the development of human civilization. First: the let-alone policy; every man to look out for number one. This is the age of selfishness. Second: the opposite pole of thinking; every man to do somebody’s else work for him. This is the dry rot of sentimentality that feeds tramps and enacts poor laws…But the third stage is represented by our formula: every man must render and receive the best possible service, except in the case of inequality, and there the strong must help the weak to help themselves; only on this condition is help given. This is the true interpretation of the life of Christ. On the first basis He would have remained in heaven and let the earth take care of itself. On the second basis He would have come to earth with his hands full of gold and silver treasures satisfying every want that unfortunate humanity could have devised. But on the third basis He comes to earth in the form of a servant who is at the same time a master commanding his disciples to take up their cross and follow Him; it is sovereignty through service as opposed to slavery through service. He refuses to make the world wealthy, but He offers to help them make themselves wealthy with true riches which shall be a hundred-fold more, even in this life, than that which was offered them by any former system.’

“This applies to political life no less than to industrial life. We live under the fairest government on earth. But it is not self-sustaining. Nor is that all. There are selfishness and injustice and evil in the world. More than that, these forces are never at rest. Some desire to use the processes of government for their own ends. Some desire to destroy the authority of government altogether. Our institutions are predicated on the rights and the corresponding duties, on the worth, of the individual. It is to him that we must look for safety. We may need new charters, new constitutions and new laws at times. We must always have an alert and interested citizenship. We have no dependence but the individual. New charters cannot save us. They may appear to help but the chances are that the beneficial results obtained result from an increased interest aroused by discussing changes. Laws do not make reforms, reforms make laws. We cannot look to government. We must look to ourselves. We must stand not in the expectation of a reward but with a desire to serve. There will come out of government exactly what is put into it. Society gets about what it deserves. It is the part of educated men to know and recognize these principles and influences and knowing them to inform and warn their fellow countrymen. Politics is the process of action in public affairs. It is personal, it is individual, and nothing more. Destiny is in you.”

On the Strength of “Weakness”

March 6, 2013March 6, 2013 / gouverneurmorris / Leave a comment

While there is much in Michael J. Gerhardt’s new book, “The Forgotten Presidents: Their Untold Constitutional Legacy,” with which this author disagrees, he ably shows that Coolidge was anything but a pushover or “weak” president. Devoting chapter twelve of his book to the thirtieth president, Gerhardt demonstrates that Coolidge had unique strength when it came to his constitutional role and the exercise of presidential powers. Coolidge, perhaps more than any of his immediate contemporaries in the office, understood both the limits and the authority vested in the Presidency. His display of leadership was unprecedented in a number of ways.

As the previous administration’s scandals went public, it was Coolidge who took the incredible step of ensuring honorable and qualified investigators (not party hacks) took the helm after which he never intervened in the process to determine the facts. The investigation was allowed to find the guilty and acquit suspicion of the innocent. As a result of both their thorough competence and Coolidge setting a tone of full cooperation from the beginning, public trust in the law was preserved.

In the use of the pardon and the veto, Coolidge distinguishes himself as anything but a timid President. Of his twenty-nine predecessors, and his immediate successor, he ranks second only to Wilson in the number of pardons granted during his time. Of his 1,545, his most noteworthy were made at the beginning of his administration, on behalf of several who had been imprisoned for their public criticism of Wilson’s involvement in the War. Even more extraordinary was the fact that he issued these pardons not only over his Attorney General’s opposition but also before request for release had been made. His fifty vetoes stand also set Coolidge apart from his contemporaries. Only Teddy Roosevelt would issue more of them in the first thirty years of the twentieth century. Not until Teddy’s cousin would the record be broken. Standing in the company of Roosevelts, Coolidge can hardly be classified a passive President. Like Grover Cleveland before him, Coolidge would use the “pocket veto” with great effect as well. By allowing a bill to die after ten days unsigned during Congressional recess, Coolidge would leave a lasting impact on the potency of the veto. His firm dissent from McNary-Haugen — twice — ensured that the President’s role in preventing bad legislation remains intact.

Coolidge’s political courage is even lesser known but just as dominant in his protection of the constitutional power to appoint officers of the Executive Branch. The earliest tussles with Congress demonstrated Coolidge could retain his nerves, remain unmoved by “mob” demands for this or that resignation and eventually prevail despite intense political heat. His resolve was not merely stubbornness but rather an abiding sense of duty and integrity. He would not join the crowd in a political lynching, however badly they wanted it. He was fair even to those who proved unfit for responsibility. He would not give in to appearances nor would he condone wrongdoing. As pointed out by others, it actually takes more strength to refrain from acting until the right moment — especially in the heat of the moment — than it is to be seen doing something now to appease onlookers with appearances. It was Coolidge who exemplified the strength of character required for decisive action only when the fullness of time warranted it. Not before. His strength, considered “weakness” by many even today, is a necessary component of wise leadership. To discount this quality is to misunderstand and fail to appreciate what makes good leaders.

On Wealth and Profits

March 4, 2013March 6, 2013 / gouverneurmorris / 1 Comment

Against the attempts to demonize “wealth” and “profits” eighty years ago, President Coolidge, in characteristic fashion, raised some fundamental question: if people do not make profits, from where do wages come? Who pays for the costs of production? By what means are people’s lives made better if not by the service of profitable businesses and wealth accumulation? He addresses each of these questions in his daily articles. It is his article from March 25th, 1931 that directly attacks the illogical hostility to “wealth.” Introducing the gift of one such wealthy individual upon her death of an estate just under $75 million (which would be about $1.1 today) to charity, he calls on the reader to remember what benefits result from such accumulation. It is, he would write, “one of the foundations of our progress. Distributed per capita, it would be ineffective; in accumulation, it supports our industries, raises the standard of living and endows educational, religious and charitable institutions. Almost all the time we find it genuinely employed in the service of the people.” Coolidge was hardly naive about those who abused great wealth, “chiefly to their own harm,” but neither did he ignore the multitude of exemplary men and women, like Ella Wendel in this article, who endowed libraries, museums, schools, foundations and numerous institutions dedicated to the betterment of people everywhere. The successful individuals who bequeathed them to us may be gone but their example and stewardship deserve our respect and emulation.

Ella Wendel with her dog, Toby

Andrew Carnegie, whose endowments made possible over 2,500 libraries around the country and overseas.

Andrew Mellon, pictured here with Amelia Earhart, gave the country the National Gallery of Art with his own collection forming its nucleus. Mellon also gave much to help numerous individuals during his lifetime and to fund several scientific innovations and private institutions long after he was gone.

None of these successful people could have given so much to so many without the accumulation of wealth derived from work.