TRAITORS

In 1831, the French magistrate Alexis de Tocqueville traveled to the United States to study its penitentiary system. He arrived in a newly established nation that had embraced the democratic system as the appropriate one to govern its fate. From that trip would emerge his work, "Democracy in America," and it would change his vocation, dedicating himself to intellectual and political production. Alexis de Tocqueville defended democracy as the best of political systems but was able to anticipate the dangers that a deficient democratic exercise could have for nations. He concludes that book by stating that "nations of our days cannot prevent the equality of conditions within them; but it depends on them whether equality leads them to servitude or freedom, to civilization or barbarism."

Democracy was born as a political system that could ensure individual freedom. Democracy and despotism are antagonistic forms of governance. Avoiding betrayal depends on the citizens themselves, who he encouraged to participate in civic associations for the common good, as a sine qua non condition for the establishment of a government that does not centralize power. Another condition to combat despotism is the culture of the citizens, since mediocrity is the basic food of tyrannies. The massification caused by democratic equality, Tocqueville assured, destroys excellence and creates among the citizenry the chimera of intellectual equality. The press, which served to underpin the foundations of American democracy, was for Tocqueville "the democratic instrument of freedom par excellence to bring different ways of thinking to the citizenry." The American judicial system prompted him to claim the absolute independence of judges. Thus, the judiciary becomes the most suitable to defend freedoms when the government threatens its persistence.

Tocqueville staunchly defended that individual rights are always guaranteed. When popular sovereignty governs the fate of the population, it is when it is most necessary to defend these individual rights, since they run the risk of being ignored by the concentration of power and thus ending true freedom.

He asserted in his posthumous work, "The Old Regime and the French Revolution," that learning democracy is extremely difficult. Highlighting that in many countries, having phenomenal moral and material progress, people take for granted that their individual rights are safe by the political system that automatically maintains them along with that exponential growth, and that is the fatal moment when other intellectual visions occupy positions. Nowadays, we could mention: Keynesian visions, from ECLAC, interventionist, statist, socialist, Marxist.

Perhaps, that learning would help, definitely, democracy and despotism could be fixed as antagonistic concepts. Currently, democratic systems have been distorted, and we are witnessing the empowerment of political trends closer to the repression of freedoms than to their exaltation. The main risk of the democratic system lies in concentrating power in rulers freely elected by the majority, which gives way to the despotism of that majority that tyrannically leads the rest of the people, subordinating the individual in all acts of his life.

THE BETRAYAL OF DEMOCRATIC LEADERSHIP IN THE USA

Much later in time, Dr. Alberto Benegas Lynch (h), in his book "United States against United States" describes that, "there is a contrast, between the extraordinary vision of the 'Founding Fathers', regarding what has been happening in the opposite sense of that spirit." A degeneration of the Essential Principles upon which the USA was founded, such as:

The division between the different religious or non-religious conceptions of political power. The so-called "wall doctrine," a sharp separation that surpassed the catastrophes recorded in history. Thus, he remembers the inquisitions, tortures, bonfires, stoning, and all kinds of persecution.

The limitation of political power: The monopoly of force is constituted solely and exclusively to protect the rights of individuals. And individuals must always have an active attitude in terms of defending those rights. That's why Jefferson said that "...the price of liberty is eternal vigilance." Each one of us must take care of protecting the rights, its principles, and that those who govern respect us. The Marxist Antonio Gramsci said: "Take culture and education and the rest will follow..." It's a matter of the mind, of education, of free thought.

The era of pseudo-rights created by traitors, to snatch other people's pockets. If I earn my money legitimately the counterpart of others is to respect my right. If governments using the power of empire grant a right to some to a similar amount of money without any work the others will be forced to give it to them. An injury to the right of those who earned it by working. Since the Magna Carta of 1215 in England, constitutions have imposed a limit on that power. Today many constitutions are a set of aspiration of desires; of pseudo-rights. The Founding Fathers set a clear limit to political power. They did not include: "the right to housing; to decent work, to health, to a retirement adjustment, to the reeducation of criminals." All pseudo-rights against the individual who pays for them. When the right is illicit, abusive, the obligation to respect it ceases; it turns society into an unlivable place, where everyone has their hands in someone else's pockets. It's not solidarity, it's despotism.

The false "equality of opportunities". In an open society, people have more opportunities, but not equal ones. The equality of opportunities is incompatible with equality before the law, because we do not have the same opportunities from a physical, intellectual, or effort perspective; we are naturally different. The concept of equality before the law is tied to the concept of respecting each one's own; it refers to the right to property expressly safeguarded by the "Founding Fathers".

As goods and services are scarcer than demand, respect for the right to property is crucial for sustaining economic growth, and with it, providing resources to society. The right to property has the great virtue of putting property in the most efficient hands to serve one's neighbor. The good merchant or entrepreneur to satisfy his patrimony, has no choice but to better satisfy the needs, desires, and complaints of his neighbor. The one who gets it right makes profits, and the one who makes a mistake or errs, incurs losses. These private losses are indispensable for economic functioning. When the politician intervenes, as has happened in the USA in defense of the financial system, bailouts were produced for irresponsible, inept, and corrupt businessmen, white-collar robbers, whose cost affected the good payer. Traitorous politicians, from power, ally to miserably exploit their fellow beings, have privileges and captive markets. "These are feudal barons, or simply, thieves."

Another fundamental principle violated is freedom of the press. Let everyone say what they please, as an exercise of freedom of thought. Which will have judicial consequences, in case of offenses, insults, injury of rights, or incitement to violence.

The "social justice" so fashionable, is a grotesque redundancy, because its nature can only be social. But in reality, that expression is used to refer to the antithesis of Justice: to take from some what belongs to them, to give to others what does not belong to them. Hayek maintains that the adjective social placed in front of any noun, turns it into its opposite. Social constitutionalism, there will be no constitution; social rights, there will be injury of rights; social justice, there will be injustices; social democracy, there will be no democracy. It is the INDIVIDUAL, it is the PERSON, who is the subject of right. The state and the government are our employees. And we have to keep them in check to protect our rights, not to get out of line, nor become a Leviathan, where public spending is elephantiasic and taxes are unbearable. Benegas Lynch especially cites John Marshall: "The possibility and tendency to destroy the open society through tax systems." Today, in most countries, no one understands why they have to pay so many taxes. They are double and triple impositions that require "experts in regulated markets", who charge for interpreting and evading them.

The betrayed right to due process. Political betrayal interferes in the appointment of prosecutors and judges to favor impunity, condemn those who denounce the injury of their rights, and justify actions of misappropriation.

In another order, the respect for the real self-determination of peoples is violated. General George Washington highlighted the importance of not getting militarily involved, nor economically contaminated elsewhere. This increases the public spending of the state force and diversifies its action in multiplied conflicts. The Armed Forces are for self-defense and not for invading other places. The foreign policy of the USA has shown repeated signs of having declined to respect it with interventions that have worsened the situation of the free world.

The principle of federalism as a fragmentation and limitation of power has also been distorted. The original idea was that the central government would deal exclusively with defense and foreign relations, for which a national tax was created. Everything else was the responsibility of lower governments. This promotes very important local incentives to avoid falling into socialist tendencies with exorbitant taxes, reduces public spending, prevents people from migrating to defend their property; while high local taxes restrict the investments essential for generating work. The "Founding Fathers" emphasized that the activities of the state are to guarantee rights, not to expand the public sphere to activities that can be developed better and more efficiently by the private sector.

Benegas revalues the concept of Natural Law (iusnaturalism) above the walls of positive legislation, insofar as it opposes natural law and freedom. And the right to resistance when a government tramples on the individual rights of people. The moral obligation of the individual to rise against it, and replace it.

Benegas Lynch highlights the nefarious effect of the central bank by affecting relative prices by determining the price of money (interest). Guidelines that redirect investment and the growth of a country. The interest signals distort essential data of the economy to freely direct it towards what is most convenient for the growth of the productive sector.

The decline of the original principles in the USA was accentuated with Roosevelt's New Deal, which ended the classic gold standard and moved to the dollar and the pound (which was quickly set aside). This allowed the USA to expand its currency. The already created foreign central banks assumed their reserves in dollars, which allowed them to issue more in their local currencies based on the already depreciated currency: the dollar. This produced the boom of the 20s in the USA and the crash of the 30s, which was prolonged due to the interventionist measures of Roosevelt: the so-called social conquests, the minimum wage, etc. The drops in capitalization rates led to an unemployment of 14 million people before the war (which disguised it). Then Truman, reluctantly eliminated the previously established price controls.

For Benegas Lynch the creation of directive bodies in education are "insults to intelligence". The USA never had a minister of education, but it did have a secretary of education created by Carter, and Reagan tried unsuccessfully to eliminate it. Education by nature is an open, competitive process of fundamental trial and error for education. The limitations to freedom of thought that academic control implies in universities, prevents free, creative educational development, and consolidates single thought.

He dedicates a special chapter to what he defines as an "aberrant" institution: the IMF, which basically serves to provide logistical support to failed, bankrupt, statist, corrupt governments, which give away resources of those who work, coercively detracted from productive people from other countries. If serious rulers financed themselves with private credit, it would ensure that it had enough guarantee of repayment and security in the use of funds.

And in another chapter dedicated to the war on drugs, he points out: "Today in the USA there are places where young people are given 15 thousand dollars a week to place drugs in schools and dance places. This demonstrates the phenomenal operational margins of the drug, which has come to create synthetics that are much more devastating. As Milton Friedman says, saying war on drugs is nonsensical, it's like saying war against aspirin, wars are against people."

Explicitly, Benegas Lynch makes a fervent defense of the right to life, when he emphatically condemns the legalization of abortion. An attack on conceived life with the spurious argument of protecting the right to dispose of the female body. Thus, the murder of the unborn defenseless is assumed by granting the mother the "right" to give life or not, by her exclusive will.

In the last chapter, he takes a look at the future, on technical issues in public goods, externalities, information asymmetry; emphasizing the moral reserves in the USA, which he maintains, fortunately are many.

OUR CONTRIBUTION:

The betrayal of the principles of the Founding Fathers, simple, natural, rational, has produced the debacle of the republic and democracy. Degenerate political leaderships gave rise to the confusion between democracy and despotism, incorporating degrees of corruption to individual right until naturalizing socialism as a "better" version of democracy.

The politician has abused electoral legitimation by giving in to the obscene appropriation of what belongs to others opposed to freedom. The "politically correct" has been transformed into a cultural dogma sweeping away the right that the people claimed to protect individual property as an inalienable right, which does not admit to being subordinated again to a politically arbitrary distribution.

The socializing version of the defense of the private, turned into: what's yours is mine, to equalize opportunities. From the power of empire, an superstructure is imposed on the individual to requisition his freedom, his property, his own thought, until selling it as a superior social collective, and cutting plain and simple freedom.

Such damage, once again in human history, mystifies the sin of greed: excessive desire for wealth; avarice, usury, miserliness, meanness.