The 10
Commandments Question
by
Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
The
5,300-pound monument to the 10 commandments in the Alabama supreme
court, and the federal order to remove it on "constitutional" grounds,
has led to a state-wide hysteria.
Those
celebrating its forced removal say it’s about separating church
and state, and thereby preventing the descent of the state into
theocracy. Meanwhile, Roy Moore, the chief justice who put the monument
there, says the controversy is "about the acknowledgment of God.
We must acknowledge God because our constitution says our justice
system is established upon God."
Now,
I live in Alabama, and I can tell you that this is not true. The
justice system is not established on God. It is established by politicians
and bureaucrats on the principle of loot. Those who live off the
loot would be very pleased for you to believe that their system
is ordained of God. That would help immunize them from criticism.
In
fact, if I wanted to be dictator of Alabama, my first act would
be to institute dispensationalist Christianity as the state religion,
and mandate a monument of the 10 commandments in every government
office. There are plenty of people who would take the bait. After
having bamboozled the population with religion, I could pretty much
do what I wanted.
The
politically unsophisticated evangelical voter tends to confuse symbolism
with reality. These are the same people who would fight to the death
for the government’s phony-baloney money to say "In God We Trust"
and for the pledge to the government to continue to say "One Nation
Under God." Some people will believe anything so long as it is intoned
in the right theological language.
It
was for this reason that liberation theology was such a brilliant
innovation. The socialists took a demonic ideology that calls for
an end to property ownership and the family, and christened it with
religious faith. So long as socialism was an atheistic creed, it
didn't make the advances it might have in Latin America. Once baptized,
socialism gained new converts.
So
it is with statism in Alabama. Wrap a despotic system of justice
in the Bible and you have a package that sells well among those
who lack the critical capacity to distinguish between symbols and
reality. It is also true on the national level, as when George Bush
invokes the Prince of Peace to justify his daily slaughter of innocents
in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There
are other reasons not to warm up to the 10 commandments in the court
house. The version Moore chose is a sectarian one promoted by Calvinist
and fundamentalist Protestants, but rejected by Catholics, Lutherans,
and Episcopalians. (The difference has to do with whether the first
commandment should be split into two parts to seem to justify iconoclasm.)
Why
are secular elites also so focused on stripping public spaces of
symbols like the 10 commandments? Why do they hate them so? The
reason is exactly what the evangelicals suspect: just as God says
thou shalt not worship other gods, the secular elites want no competition
for their claim to god-like status, even if such competition exists
only in symbolic form.
The
10 commandments monument is an aggressive statement that there is
a higher law a law higher than the state to which all are obligated
to submit. The power elite cannot abide such claims. Right and wrong
are to be determined by the rulers and no one else.
Thus
it is not theocracy that the opponents of Moore fear, but rather
anything that challenges the sovereignty of the managerial state.
They say they want separation of church and state but what they
really want is for the rule of the state and its laws and morality
to enjoy overarching and undisputed authority. No other authority not
even the 10 commandments can be permitted.
What
is really at issue in the narrow question of whether the monument
should stay or go is a conflict over authority: is God and His immutable
and transcendent standards of justice the final authority, or is
it the central state? But in the end, it is the broader question
that is more important, namely, who decides?
The
conflict is easily resolved by a simple tool cooked up hundreds
of years ago: federalism. This is the one principle at work that
hardly anyone wants to talk about. The very core of the constitutional
system is that it permits divided power. The states created the
central government to serve the states, not the other way around.
According to the constitution, so long as the states have republican
forms of government (not monarchies), they govern themselves.
The
architects of the constitution would have been aghast to see a federal
judge telling a state supreme court that it cannot display the 10
commandments. To do so is an obvious and absurd violation of not
only the 10th and 1st amendments, but the
whole spirit of federalism that Lord Acton called the unique contribution
of the American system.
Federalism
is a means of peace. It recognized and codified the universal desire
for self-government over outside imposition. It was supposed to
protect the citizens against something everyone in all times despises:
namely, dictatorial rule by outsiders. In this sense, there is an
analogy between those protesting the removal of the 10 commandments
in Alabama and Iraqis working to get out from under the military
dictatorship of an imperial army of foreigners. Whether anyone else
thinks their particular cause is right or wrong, the real point
is that Alabamians and Iraqis ought to be permitted to govern themselves.
For this reason, Ed
Crane at Cato is wrong that "the federal court that ruled the
display of the 10 commandments had to be removed from a government
building was on solid constitutional grounds."
What
if Iraqis desire an Islamic theocracy? What if Alabamians make the
10 commandments the official law of the land? Some people may like
the result and others may not. Self-government does not solve all
conflicts, but it does bring them down to a manageable level. It
is up to Iraqis and Alabamians to determine their own futures. Above
all, the principle of decentralization prevents the greatest evil
in all of human history: the unleashing of the consolidated Leviathan
state on unwilling subjects.
August
30, 2003
Llewellyn
H. Rockwell, Jr. [send him
mail] is president of the Ludwig
von Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, and editor of LewRockwell.com.
Copyright
© 2003 LewRockwell.com
Lew
Rockwell Archives
|