On Agriculture

Born of hardy farming stock, Calvin Coolidge knew firsthand the costs and difficulties of such an investment. With the vote against passage of the Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Management Act (H.R. 1947), roles have certainly reversed from the days when the President, not Congress, was acting to restrain federal spending as the best help government could render.

President Coolidge would veto both McNary-Haugen farm relief bills for their mechanisms to fix prices artificially, instead of letting the market decide value. The equalization fee of both pieces of legislation encouraged a special favor to one segment of the country — farmers — a device Coolidge never supported toward anyone, regardless of the form of their contributions to commerce. He held that constructive economy, not spending to compensate farmers for overproduction or veterans for their incalculable sacrifice, was for the benefit of all alike. Lobbyists, like George N. Peek who pressed Congress for “farm parity, as Gilbert C. Fite termed it, should not dissuade legislators from this commitment to represent the interests of all their constituents.

What was conspicuously missing in the legislation of McNary-Haugen, who were both Republicans (a fact that did not hold any weight with President Coolidge), was a recognition of what farmers can do for themselves. The haste for government to spare people (voters) from the consequences of certain choices was no less acute then as it is now. It was the President, in two powerfully written veto messages, who reminded the large and influential farm bloc of some obvious truths when it came to farmers. Farming has always and will ever be a supremely difficult task. No law can take all the risk or uncertainty out of working with the land.

Farmers can still help alleviate some of the difficulties they face by altering how they operate instead of running to Washington for help. For instance, farmers can diversify the crops they grow. By cultivating a variety of foods, the farmer is expanding the scope of yield without overproducing any one commodity. The farmer, as Coolidge would write in his daily column after the Presidency, best helps the soil — the center of the farmer’s world — and himself, when he expands into greater self-sufficiency in both crops and stock. Making an unpopular but glaringly simple observation, Coolidge saw the solution to overproduction (be it wheat, cotton or any other item on the market) was producing less in single-crop operations by broadening into different areas of agriculture.

In areas, particularly those in the West, creating discord between farmers, ranchers and consumers, co-operatives instead of government price-manipulation schemes could be an answer. Coolidge saw better results possible when farmers voluntarily collaborated, as used to be the case in rural communities, to form co-operatives that deploy their own efforts to improve efficiency, find markets for their produce and enable local problems to be resolved by the people directly involved. Government would not do any favors helping reward overproduction, prop-up higher export rates or rescue farmers from hard times. President Coolidge, through articulating reminders of the obvious, spelled out a way farmers can escape the many unintended consequences that follow when government gets involved. Many farmers wanted the assistance in spite of what it meant for the rest of the country. Coolidge knew he could point the way to self-reliance applied to the problems facing agriculture, but it would only succeed if farmer’s made it work for themselves.

It is thanks to the resolve and foresight of President Coolidge that farmers were spared the loss of their independence from Washington’s management, at least for the rest of his administration, while constructive economy continued for everyone. It is a reminder that we are much more capable of effecting solutions to our own problems than we may realize. At its heart, Coolidge’s reasons for vetoing these bills were grounded in a confidence that we, as free men and women, possess all the abilities we need to “work out our own salvation,” as he would put it. Therein lies greater potential for success than any of us imagine.

Image

President Coolidge pitching hay on the Blanchard Farm in Pinney Hollow, up the road from Plymouth (Thanks to Corbis Images).

“Why I Am A Republican”

“Why I Am A Republican”

The recent statement of Mr. Elbert Guillory explaining his change of support for the historical principles of the Republican Party echoes many of the thoughts expressed by our thirtieth President, Calvin Coolidge. He would have stood with this man, an American who understands the duties of freedom, to advance our common cause of citizenship. As Coolidge would say back in 1922, “The meaning of America is not to be found in a life without toil. Freedom is not only bought with a great price; it is maintained by unremitting effort. The successful conduct of our economic life is not easy. It cannot be made easy. The burdens of existence, the weight of civilization, cannot be taken from the people.” The government that promises to lift such burdens cannot and never will. It will only result in further loss to people’s liberty in the name of protection.

Coolidge would assess difficulties not unlike what we now face, “The final solution of these problems will not be found in the interposition of government in all the affairs of the people, but rather in following the wisdom of [George] Washington, who refused to exercise authority over the people, that the people might exercise authority over themselves.” Addressing men and women at Howard University he spoke with the fullest confidence in individuals just like Mr. Guillory to embrace the opportunities of self-government and to realize the potential freedom holds from all forms of enslavement, mental as well as physical. He would champion the example of folks like Mr. Guillory without pretense or condescension, when he said, “The Nation has need of all that can be contributed to it through the best efforts of all its citizens…We can not go out from this place and occasion without refreshment of faith and renewal of confidence that in every exigency our Negro fellow citizens will render the best and fullest measure of service whereof they are capable.”

That service, seen in the examples of Senator Guillory, Dr. King, Dr. Robert Moton, Justice Thomas and Dr. Carson (to name but a few), is not to preserve the “masters” of the Democrat Party establishment, to prop up dependance on Washington (or bondage to any administration for that matter) but is living up to the highest ideals of American citizenship. It is an expression of the spirit of self-reliance, a fulfillment of duty to God and family, and a giving of one’s self in civic participation, that makes our freedom possible.

On the Human Race and America’s Source of Exceptionalism

At the NATO Summit in Strasbourg, France, back in 2009, the current assessment of what makes America exceptional was summarized this way, “I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism.” This familiar statement from four years not only misses the point, perhaps even intentionally, but also repudiates the profound distinction.

Outsiders mistake it for arrogance, as if humanity itself does not struggle with hubris, envy or selfish ambition. In purely material terms, America has made possible an unprecedented standard of living, a presence felt globally, and a recurring willingness to aid those in need anywhere in the world. In moral and spiritual terms, the Founders, by studying the ideas of those who came before them, discovered that a system of self-government, protecting the individual by strictly limiting the powers of the State, rather than the reverse, was the basis for a free and fair society. Up to then, the norm had been to empower rulers over individuals, to secure the State. The people revolved around government. Now the balance was returned to recognizing the individual as sovereign while restraining government power. This discovery wrought exceptional results, even with all the obstructions, setbacks and difficulties Americans have encountered in a short two hundred and forty years.

It is in this way, by restoring the ideals of self-government to the foundation of society, that America found they were the exception to the way the rest of the world chose to work. This is American exceptionalism: adopting a set of ideals that all who come here must share if liberty is to remain for everyone. Those ideals must also be infused with hard work to find opportunity and exercise the responsibilities of independence. Those unfamiliar with our optimistic ideals, accept defeat when faced with the slightest resistance of circumstances. Millions around the world languish in real need and emptiness because of this lack of faith in people to govern themselves. Sovereignty resides in the few at the top with privileges doled out and taken back when it suits. Humanity shares this test everywhere. We are no different. It is in America, though, that a deliberate choice has been made to depart from this oppressive and wasteful system of controls, embracing instead the higher ideal of independence with responsibility.

Calvin Coolidge saw this impasse and explained it in 1923 this way,

“There are two broad theories which have held sway in the world. They have developed with the development of the [human] race. One is the system of class and caste, of a claim of divine right of rulers by inheritance — a system where the individual is nothing and the government is all supreme…

     “There is another system with which every American should be familiar, a system of equality and of freedom, not without the claim of divine right, but recognizing that such right reposes in the people; a system where the individual is clothed with inalienable rights, the people are supreme, the government is their agent. Under this conception there is real freedom, real independence, and grave personal responsibility. The rulers look to the people. Their authority is the public will, ascertained in accordance with law. There will be the least possible interference with private affairs. Realizing that it is people who support the government and not the government which supports the people, there will be no resort to paternalism. Under such institutions there may appear to be a lack of machine-like efficiency, but there will be no lack of character. Private initiative will be stimulated. Self-reliance and self-control will be increased. Society will remain a living organism sustaining hope and progress, content to extend its dominion not by conquest but by service. Such is the system of self-government, the orderly rule of the people, carrying within itself a remedy for its own disorders and the power of self-perpetuation. This is the ideal of America.

     “No one would say that existence under these conditions is effortless. Independence is exceedingly exacting, self-control is arduous, self-government is difficult. Always there is the temptation that some element of these should be surrendered in exchange for security and ease [emphasis added]. The appeal to passion and prejudice always lies in this direction. The proposal to despoil others of their possessions is a manifestation of the same spirit. This is reason that to certain of our native-born, and more often to our foreign-born, the American Republic proves a disappointment. They thought that self-government meant the absence of all restraint, that independence meant living without work, and that freedom was the privilege of doing what they wanted to do. It has been a hard lesson for them to learn that self-government is still government, that the rule of the people does not mean absence of authority, that independence means self-support, and that, complete freedom means complete obedience to law. They are disappointed more than ever when they learn, as ever they do, that these are so, not because they have been decreed by some body of men, but that they are so by the very nature of things, and all the governments in the world are powerless to change them.

     “Here again it is perfectly obvious that if the American system is to be cast aside there is only the one other system which can be adopted. The call of the old life of ignorance, of fear, of superstition, of every savage instinct is all toward the old system. The call of the new life of learning, of courage, of enlightened reason, of faith, of religion, is all toward the new system” (quoted from “Calvin Coolidge: His Ideals of Citizenship As Revealed Through His Speeches and Writings” by Edward E. Whiting, Boston: W. A. Wilde, 1924, pp.20-23).

                           Image