iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Gary Hart

GET UPDATES FROM Gary Hart
 

Welcome to the American Republic, Mr. Eastwood

Posted: 08/31/2012 4:09 pm

Tempting as it is to send the iconic movie-maker Clint Eastwood a copy of Plato or even one of my books on the Republic, it would probably not make his day. But the past week, with its attempt to focus on economic issues, despite candidates telling their life stories or auditioning for national office in 2016, totally ignored the very nature of our nation. We are a republic, instituted as such by our Founders using the ancient republican ideal and classical model, and launched with the hope, and even expectation, that future generations down to the present day would live up to that ideal and its principles.

Partisan politics, so wrapped up in creating an antagonism between capitalism and government, misses the point. If we are to maintain ourselves as a republic, certain foundational principles of a republic must be upheld regardless of our economic structures. They are: popular sovereignty (power to the people, not Wall Street or Washington); resistance to corruption (placing special interests ahead of the common good); a sense of the common good (all those things that we own and hold in common); and most of all civic duty, citizen responsibility, and citizen participation.

Mr. Eastwood, being a dramatist, could have made quite a discussion with that chair concerning these qualities and whether we all, not just the president, live up to them. The convention arena would have been even more dumbfounded, doubtless to the point of silence. Any lingering suspicion regarding his sobriety or mental state would have fled. He would have had to revert to Dirty Harry to keep them from storming the stage. For they were there to belabor the president for not fixing the mess he inherited from He Who Shall Not Be Named and to rescue poor, misunderstood bankers from presidential, and public, scorn.

Leaving the quadrennial struggle for power aside for the moment, at risk in the 21st century isn't capitalism. It is republicanism. Though we elect our government, we do not have power because this republic is massively corrupt. Special interests dominate the executive and legislative process, even more so now thanks to the judicial branch. They do so by controlling campaign contributions. And any effort to defend the common good, our public resources and facilities, the systems of education, transportation, and even communications, that make us a national community, are met with Tea Party chants of "socialism".

We are left, then, with what makes a republic a republic -- civic virtue, citizen duty. A number of state officials are hellbent on making voting more difficult. A surprising number of people say that jury duty, which many seek to avoid, is one of the most interesting and rewarding experiences they have ever had. We celebrate our volunteer warriors as we send them off to war, whether necessary or not, but too often forget those who return wounded in body or spirit. But few citizens attend regular community meetings unless their immediate interest is involved. Oscar Wilde said socialism would never work because it involved "too many evenings." That's not socialism; that's republicanism.

I wish Mr. Eastwood's chair had held not a phantom Obama, but a live Jefferson.

 
 
 

Follow Gary Hart on Twitter: www.twitter.com/gary__hart

FOLLOW POLITICS
Tempting as it is to send the iconic movie-maker Clint Eastwood a copy of Plato or even one of my books on the Republic, it would probably not make his day. But the past week, with its attempt to foc...
Tempting as it is to send the iconic movie-maker Clint Eastwood a copy of Plato or even one of my books on the Republic, it would probably not make his day. But the past week, with its attempt to foc...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 677
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (12 total)
01:37 PM on 09/19/2012
Oh, hot air Hart! Clint sounds like he really got the best of you. All that bloviating over a 10 minute impromptu speech from an 82 year old iconic actor? He was playing to the Republicans at the RNC. And they all seemed to enjoy it! Which is really all that matters. Clint certainly could care less what you think. I can't think of any reason anybody else would either. Here's laughing at you!
07:13 AM on 09/07/2012
Gary, I think the President heard you: citizenry
shylove2
warfare state is pathological
08:10 PM on 09/03/2012
Yes and i heard a historian on Johnson say he knew the Tonken Gulf epidode was false and the war he undertook in Vietnam would fail. Meanding that is wa illegal and he was sendin solider to their deth, but the historiarinma called im great. And then when he did try to negotiate out the Nixon/kissinger complex sabotaged the whole venture of not running again in order to try and get us out.
Then we lie and feed off of 9/11 fever to go after a third world country on the the UN danction ropes for more lies. Civic what is Congress handing out Presidential blank checks called? From the USS Maine until today and now no state refuses to hand over its Guard for war lies like New England states stiffed the War of 1812. And let them have multiple deployments too. And tample on the Internationl Law we help craft to begin with.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
visionra
05:13 PM on 09/03/2012
Great article--- to much free money for the politicals - Sheldon should be ashamed of himself - so much money but where is his god
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
gevan
big dubya
02:24 AM on 09/03/2012
Hart '84.
02:21 AM on 09/03/2012
Does the fact that Clint Eastwood has a movie coming out soon account for his free commercial this past week?
03:56 PM on 09/15/2012
Of course it was, lol, next up for clint was the tonight show, lol I mean he gave a great proformance, as a forgetful old guy, opps was that at the convention, or the movie, I forget. To bad Amy Adams wasn't around to save his ass.
09:59 PM on 09/02/2012
Bravo. ......well said Mr.Hart
08:12 PM on 09/02/2012
Did I hear Clint right_We own this country? Was he talking about only those like himself with in the top 0.1 percent?
09:16 PM on 09/02/2012
Not too bright are you, taxpayers own this Country.... the Government owns nothing.... they have no income....

We The people own this Country... We the people Built this Country.

I know, these are hard issues for Liberals to understand.... and today they re-stated that a balanced budget is a bad idea....

Need I say more?
12:31 AM on 09/03/2012
Based on comments made by donors at parties, this was a reasonable question. Especially since I was not able to understand some of the other rambling he did.
As to who own this country, I will gladly have the people own it but I wish it was owned a lot more evenly. You are wrong ifd you believe taxpayers only are the owners of this country and I am sure if you think for a while you may be able to figure it out in your little brain.
As for liberals, I am not a liberal, I am a progressive and I am absolutely sure that the government should run a deficit in a recession. This recession according to economists and I know of none who disagree is due to lack of effective demand and accepted economic theory, not some ginned up political philosophy to give tax breaks to the rich.holds that to get it going the government needs to spend more. This has worked many times both here and abroad, whereas the politics of austerity has never been shown to do anything but deepen and lengthen a recession. It is just like global warming. Science and education trumps your willful ignorance.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Abraham1771
Polymath Rationalist
01:08 AM on 09/03/2012
Need I say more? you say;

Yeah, you could try to make sense, be logic, factual, instead of the rambling non-sense of empty sentences, devoid of any specifics.

Ask the Koch Brother who they thing own the country, and in particular the Republican Party (why gets 1/5/of small contributions than the Democrats) and the Supreme Court.

Count who paays for all the hateful TV ds? The Peole? No karl rove and his Oligarchs.

It is an exact replay of Nazi Germany 1030-32, where industrialists like one Alfred Hugenberg basically bought the Press and the radio Stations to support Hitler.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Juven
08:32 AM on 09/03/2012
Socialist Holly wood think they own the country. Wait until Barack start asking them for their 1%
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Daryl E Claybrooks
Just a regular guy!!!
06:27 PM on 09/02/2012
Again, no matter your politics we're ALL here trying to make it!!! And while you don't expect the Federal Govt to solve all of your problems, you do expect it to help with providing quality employment options and opportunities so you can resolve your personal financial responsibilities with a some vacation time thrown in!!!
photo
heron77
Drive on the right
09:05 PM on 09/02/2012
The government is similar to the associations of athletics. They exist not for the sake of the association, but to promote fair play and establish regulations for the different teams. The teams are similar to the businesses. Each hires a coach and staff that does its best to compete. The regulations are enforced by referees and when the referees do their job, the teams are on an equal footing.

But the teams could be hurt with too many regulations that make the game difficult to play. And if too many referees are placed on the field or court, they actually inhibit the players by being in their way.

What we need are sensible approaches to rules and referees, but not forget that the teams (businesses) are the reason for being.
10:52 PM on 09/02/2012
I liked your analogy up until the last sentence.

The government is "of the people, by the people, for the people." (A. Lincoln, Republican)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Daryl E Claybrooks
Just a regular guy!!!
11:34 PM on 09/03/2012
Shouldn't the "teams" use more homegrown talent?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Abraham1771
Polymath Rationalist
01:09 AM on 09/03/2012
Vacation times?
Like Germany, governed by Christian Democrats?
Next thing you will claim that Christ threw the bankers out of the temple?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Daryl E Claybrooks
Just a regular guy!!!
12:29 PM on 09/03/2012
um, no comparison to any other country and no disrespect to that country; if it works for them, good on 'em. Rather, in so many words an individual would like the find/have a quality decent paying job to cover their lifestyle and vacation time to enjoy the fruits of their labor.  No more, no less.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ariando
Compassion: a feature, not a bug.
04:29 PM on 09/02/2012
Obama can bring the empty chair on stage and say, "And now from the department of Republican new ideas . . ."
Artu Di-tu
El valiente vive hasta que el cobarde quiere
06:09 PM on 09/02/2012
Bringing the GOP on stage "live" is soooo much better...for the best and full effect.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
pa104inf
11:10 PM on 09/02/2012
Or we could ask President Obama why in four years he hasn't fixed the problems. Let's see, annual GDP rate of 1%, real unemployment rate of 17%, 4.00 a gallon for gasoline, triple food prices since he took office, and unknown real inflation rate since we don't include food and energy prices in inflation rate calculations. It seems the "man without a clue" who presently sits in the oval office has no ideas himself.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Abraham1771
Polymath Rationalist
01:16 AM on 09/03/2012
The answer was given by President Eisenhower in a press Conference July 7, 1953:
The obligations by the previous Government, linger for many years.

I am sorry that you are suffering from discalculia, just like Paul Ryan. Your numbers are all phantasy. Triple food prices? I don't show at a shop where the veggies are being sold on golden plates.

In particular the Government of George W. Bush, where the economy lost 800,000 jobs a months when Obama was inaugurated.

Obama has created more jobs since the stimulus kicked in in July of 2oo9 then George Bush in 8 years.

The George Bush Administration which is the only one since 1940 which actually has lost jobs in 8 years.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
coyoteb1
02:34 PM on 09/02/2012
Might I suggest, Mr. Hart, that limiting Senate and House seats to two terms would go a long, long way to solve this problem
03:44 PM on 09/02/2012
Terrible idea.

What you're left with is a bunch of unskilled and inexperienced politicians even more dependent on advisors and lobbyists (often the same people). The root of the problem - entrenched political parties - is in no way addressed by this and, in many ways such a plan would give them more power to allocate or control seats.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
John Dillingerr
revolt against tyranny
07:33 PM on 09/02/2012
that is what is in the house and senate now

a bunch of used car salesmen
11:47 AM on 09/04/2012
As an example, Senator Hart was a skilled and experienced politician, and he served, by choice, only two terms in the Senate.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
eric steven
u bio
04:39 PM on 09/02/2012
yeah right... the rush to money-grab would only accelerate.

we need campaign finance reform.

i think that intense salary raises for incumbents would also be good. it's the people vote, the people govt and the peoples money. give them $100,000+ raise every time they are re-elected. that would not impact campaign coffers much and people (taxpayers) might think more about what it is they are getting at the ballot.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Dan Masters
02:11 PM on 09/02/2012
two phrases used in this article that were completely missing from republican speeches last week: civic duty and citizen responsibility
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Abraham1771
Polymath Rationalist
01:18 AM on 09/03/2012
But Ayn Rand did not use these words, ... You communist!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
madhtr
01:57 PM on 09/02/2012
" ... I wish Mr. Eastwood's chair had held not a phantom Obama, but a live Jefferson ..."

Sir, Mr Jefferson is rolling in his grave over your politics.
03:37 PM on 09/02/2012
A live Jefferson would DEPLORE the politics which this article describes; it is not "your politics" [if you refer to Gary Hart] which would appall him. It is selling out the nation to the highest bidders, those who can now buy elections.
12:15 PM on 09/04/2012
If you are referring to Gary Hart's politics than you know nothing about the true Jefferson. You should do some research and reading. Did you know that Jefferson was a proponent of reviewing and revising the Constitution about every 20 years to keep up with the changing economy, diversity of population and culture of the American people? Many people who use the Constitution and Jefferson as a their bullypulpit really know very little about either.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dbackl
Guns kill people - the rest is rhetoric
10:58 AM on 09/02/2012
Thanks Gary, power to the people.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Conservative Roy
07:13 PM on 09/02/2012
"Power to the people?" Are you kidding? All Gary, and every other liberal wants, is to take what little power the people have left and hand it to the govt. that they wish to expand.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dbackl
Guns kill people - the rest is rhetoric
07:40 PM on 09/02/2012
You obviously are too busy making assumption to know what power to the people means.
RobertReport
ex mia sententia
08:42 PM on 09/02/2012
I'd rather hand it to the government than to the Koch Bros. Adelson and other unelected Plutocrats.. At least the government is run by our elected representatives.
09:20 PM on 09/02/2012
Can't, Obama took that right from us.... Gave it to the smarter Government.... they know what is best for everyone.... and remember, you didn't build that... Obama did... and you owe him...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dbackl
Guns kill people - the rest is rhetoric
11:01 PM on 09/02/2012
What a sad life you lead
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Abraham1771
Polymath Rationalist
01:23 AM on 09/03/2012
Oh you , too.
You successful small business owner built the Internet Obama said you did not build?

Yeah, he specifically mentioned the Internet, before he said the business you built is due solely due to your initiative.

But the Internet, "you did not build "THAT"! But apparently you, and 1.5 Million SBO did!
photo
WaldoForever
Gentleman and Scholar. Mostly.
10:58 AM on 09/02/2012
Without disagreeing with your point, allow me to discourage one all-too-common idée fixe that just bothers me. Our soldiers are not volunteers: they are paid, trained and highly skilled professionals. I understand the appeal of the ideal of the volunteer soldier - it echoes the minutemen of the revolution and the enlistees of WWII who each stood up to fight a grave threat - but calling today's soldiers volunteers diminishes them. It's like referring to a civil engineer as a day laborer, or a bank CEO as a glorified clerk. Respect our soldiers for what the are, not for how they appear to the public imagination.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
DFW-JB
anybody hungry?
01:55 PM on 09/02/2012
Well-said, and I certainly agree with your point regarding professionals. But as a Vietnam-era older adult, I took the phrase to mean "volunteer, not conscripted." In that sense, these noble young people volunteer just as others do when they choose another path, and this in no way diminishes them or their choice.
photo
WaldoForever
Gentleman and Scholar. Mostly.
02:42 PM on 09/02/2012
Well, I'd be ok with that interpretation if we also talked about, say, noble young people volunteering as teachers. But in practice teachers are roundly critiqued for the meager salaries they draw doing a job that's as difficult and important as defending our country's interests, if not more so. There are too many political figures trying to edge out some advantage by portraying soldiers as self-sacrificing heroes, when in truth modern warfare is largely Clausewitzian: a mere extension of the business of politics, in which soldiers are paid to go where they're sent and do what they're told regardless of any personal commitment. There are times in history when war must occur to meet a clear and present threat and people must rise to the occasion - that happened in WWII, for instance - but these days (for the most part) war is politically vainglorious and/or purely expedient.

US soldiers do their job and do it well, and I wouldn't have it any other way. But I'm not inclined to let some armchair Hawk leverage their 'noble sacrifices' for some ignoble political end. That doesn't sit well with me.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Michael D OBrien
We can be heroes, if just for one day!
02:44 PM on 09/02/2012
You do not understand context...................
The term 'volunteer' in NO way diminishes these brave men and women.
Take it from a volunteer. US Army '70-'73.
And I'm quite willing to bet you were NEVER in the military!
What this country needs is another draft.
THEN and only then, let the politicians make the case for the importance of these military incursions, for the 'survival' of our country. See how fast the chicken hawks will be singing a different tune!
06:40 PM on 09/02/2012
Let the politicians sons and/or daughters be the first to be drafted. When their loved ones come home maimed, suffering from mental illness and at worst deceased, then they not only sing a different tune they will stop singing all together.
ByAndForThePeople
and corporations aren't people!
07:12 PM on 09/02/2012
Like DFW-JB, I am also a VietNam era older adult. I understand the problems with the draft (conscription) all too well. When the army recruiter told me "Son, we need people to go over there and stop bullets," it was all too clear that the whole thing was out of control. The all-volunteer (i.e., not conscripted) army was a great way to prevent ordinary people from screaming bloody murder at the politicians when they sent "our boys" (and, now, "our girls") off to war. Why? Well, because most of the public's kids were not at risk, as they would be with conscription.

But, after decades of consideration, I'm convinced that America should have an army made up of professional soldiers who keep things running month-to-month, year-to-year, augmented by leagues of ordinary citizens who are conscripted to go out there to "stop bullets". With the protections we already have against sending true pacifists to war (instead sending them to do critical non-military services elsewhere in the USA), everybody of the appropriate ages, without exception, must be eligible for conscription -- including rich people's kids alongside poor folks and middle-class people's kids.

If a war is important enough for America to fight, then it's important enough for ALL Americans to sacrifice to fight, not just a select few.