Recent Post

Searching...
July 28, 2013

Essay on Liberty and Tyranny

A critique of Liberty and Tyranny by Mark Levin
Liberty and tyranny is a book written by mark Levin in which he wrote about his view point about issues related to business ethics with respect to constitutional laws. This book was an example of his controversial demonstration about conservative moments. In this book he addressed different aspects and relationships of conservative ideology with liberty. He demonstrates that how non conservatism is similar to dictatorship. He is against the statist’s agenda in America’s founding. The book fall into several topics this includes faith of founding fathers, constitution, academia, federalism, free market, welfare, environment and immigration [www.historyphilosophybooks.suite101.com].
       It is a book that managed to define well conservatism in the era of liberal expansion. However he did not explore prescriptive constitution and did not evaluate critiques on natural rights. In fact according to his perspective natural rights can be way to limit government. He supposed that natural rights have the capacity of prevention of expansionist government. The high point of this concept is that it individualizes the power where the power of government is abided with independent departments like of laws, executive and judicial. This separation of power has an effective solution the problem that has arisen by the natural rights basis. According to him this separation of power is just like a joker on the deck for the statists. The separation of power is a meaning provided to constitution by mark Levin. He argues that constitution is being ignored by the politicians; they do not respect its provisions which began by the disrespect of our founding principle. This system has decreased the effectiveness and activeness of the federal government [Ruben Alvarado, 2009].
     The Levin says in his book that the modern political system of America is the system where there is an absolute control of government exists. He suggests conservatism as a remedy to the tyranny. He is the torch bearer of the conservative thoughts. Any political rule or thought that does not match the Levin’s perspective of conservatism is a tyranny to him. In this book he supports his vision by mentioning the historical events of politics in America regardless of that he has left the significant part of America’s political history. He mainly left those parts from his thesis that goes against his conservatism or those parts which shows the weakness of his conservatism theory. According to him conservatism is a politically correct and it protects liberty. He does not specify the demerits of his assumptions he only specified the merits of conservatism.
     He argues about liberalism of the politicians and does not favor it. He calls them statist who follows modern liberalism and does not like the idea of supremacy of government over an individual. But the reality is differs from his illusions. The statism exists from the founding of America’s political history. Even there are several founders who come up with the mark Levin’s definition of statism though he does not call them statist in the book. He wants to point out the risks that he felt in the democratic government by ignoring individualism. He forbids the excess presence of democracy. The way he describes the founding’s and founders of democracy or America’s political history is controversial. The way he demonstrate it, is not the exactly the actual reality of the democracy [Doug Kammerer, 2010].
     Mark Levin is in favor of restraint of conservatism later on in his book. According to the author of an article George W bush falls in the category of statism which is described by Levin because of his patriotic act and bank bailouts. He also criticized on the modern politicians who claim that they are the followers of conservatism. According to him they do not completely fulfills the demand of conservatism, they are actually the rule breakers of conservatism, which insecure the individuality. This is might be the reason of his concern towards the problem raised by democracy and modernization in conservatism. He calls the modern conservatism a statist as well. He did not describe the how the conservatism illustrated by him can actually work. The ground realities of conservatism do not match the history of conservatism describe by him. He wants to distract the modern liberal and wants to establish a new horizon of conservatism by excusing the history of conservative’s statism. He developed illusions in his manifesto about the history of conservatism that never existed [http://www.nationalreview.com].



References:
Ruben Alvarado (2009). Common Law & Natural Rights. Ruben Alvarado
Doug Kammerer (2010). Average Doug: My Take on America: From Politics and Government to Society. Doug kamerrer

0 comments:

Post a Comment