- Published: 27 December 2011
"Lawfully Speaking" Vol II, Issue No. 1
A Periodic Internet Political Column
Written by William H. Huff
The word democracy has been one of the most abused and misunderstood terms in the English language, except perhaps for the word love.
I will suggest in this article that Rush is ill-advised at best to use the term democracy in the context above - to assign it to himself as if it were a badge of honor. Why? Because "words mean things." More than that, they mean different things to different people.
Samuel Adams, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and Noah Webster would all have cringed at the notion of being called the Doctor of Democracy. Yet they came to be known as the Father of the Revolution, the Father of our Country, the Father of the Declaration, the Father of the Constitution, and the Father of American Education, respectively.
The term "democracy" has become a mantra for facilitating the emerging consolidated global government. It is being used to sell everything but original American political philosophy to every human being on the planet. Of course Rush is fond of discounting any notion of "conspiracy theories," therefore none will appear in this article. Semantics is the weapon of choice in psychopolitics and Rush is either knowingly or unknowingly using semantics to the advantage of those who have large financial interests in a global system where national sovereignty as well as individual liberty are viewed as passé.
Anyone who doubts the word democracy is being used to hypnotize the masses has but to do a little word search exercise applied to the text of any recent speech by the demagogue of your choice. Kofi Annan and Bill Clinton are prime examples.
I have heard many hours of Rush Limbaugh and consider him an important study on how the American people can be provoked on either side of a controversial argument, or is it merely mass distraction?
Since he touts himself as "all-knowing [a designation that he will probably discount as only a tool to provoke the "left" or just shtick] I will suggest he should use every opportunity to choose words to instruct his audience in the way of truth. If "words mean things" it follows that words teach things.
He may also say that the show is just for entertainment. But that in no way can account for the fact that caller after caller dutifully reminds Rush of how much he has learned from listening; of how often he has used the words of the all-knowing one to refute the silly arguments of some "lefty." In fact, there can be little doubt that Rush relishes the notion of himself as a leader.
Rush is a teacher there can be no doubt, but what are his pupils learning? What are they emulating and acting out?
Rush can make all the excuses he wants. But that will do nothing to remedy the acute lack of true knowledge "all across the fruited plain" that is partially caused and/or perpetuated by talk radio generally and Rush Limbaugh specifically. There are a few heroic exceptions to the rule, but by and large, talk show hosts are more in tune with making payments on their BMWs than with saving the Republic.
We long for Rush to point his listeners away from symbolism and toward substance.
I am reminded of the words of Mordecai to Queen Esther in the book that bears her name: "For if thou altogether holdest thy peace at this time, then shall there enlargement and deliverance arise to the Jews from another place; but thou and thy father's house shall be destroyed: and who knoweth whether thou art come to the kingdom for such a time as this? - Esther 4:14 KJV
If Esther had failed to stand up and be counted I suppose the book would have been named for someone else. Whereas Esther risked her head I think it a small thing for Rush to risk his future fortune. But what is there to be afraid of if there really are no conspiracies?
I am not looking for an American messiah in Rush either. I would, however, be pleased to see him using his success for the true good of his country. He can keep all of the money, I don’t care. I don’t care if he makes ten times as much. But if he could just get this one term [democracy] straight, I could hold him in much higher esteem. There are many other things he could do if he really loves America, but this distinction could make a remarkable beginning. Left uncorrected, this lack of distinction between terms could mean a great deal more about Rush than we might care to know.
Those who think the distinction between a Constitutional Republic and a Democracy is at all trivial should spend a little more time reading Jefferson, Madison and Samuel Adams, to name only three of "a great cloud of witnesses."
This criticism is not a personal attack. It is balanced and well thought through. Further, it will be accompanied by irrefutable solutions. We offer these well-documented solutions here at Lexrex.
Anomalies are those "little" things that stick out and sometimes help us to eventually discover patterns and underlying facts and truths that may have gone unnoticed before.
After having taken some time off from being a regular Rush listener, while I have been reading and studying more about American political philosophy, I decided to check in with Rush. As I listened to the opening and heard him refer to himself as the "Doctor of Democracy," it occurred to me once again that Rush could be missing a huge opportunity to educate his listeners. Why would he choose such a title for himself? Why would he use a term whose meaning has become so elusive to so many?
Let us assume Rush has no guile and that he is nothing more than one of the most financially successful entertainers of our time. Yet, he earns his Bread by setting up or making fun of controversies between the so-called right and the so-called left.
Can he fail to see that so many American solutions are already accomplished and waiting for us to wake up from our sleep of ignorance? Can Rush take the opportunity of his moment of fame and squander the possibility that he might point millions in the right direction?
He demonstrates more than the average acquaintance with the writings and principles espoused by the Founding Fathers and the Framers of the U.S. Constitution. However, he does not spend a great deal of effort pointing to the specific sources for solutions that were completely worked out by our Founding generation and those who spent the hot summer of 1787 forging the Constitution of a Republic - NOT A DEMOCRACY!
The distinction between a Republic and a Democracy as a form of government is so important and so profound that it can never be overstated while there is one American left who cannot distinguish between the two. If this article encourages even one American to consider the incredibly important differences between a Republic and a Democracy, as well as how crucial it is for Americans not to exchange one for the other, it will have been worthwhile.
George Orwell, who spent considerable time unraveling the psychobabble of his day, said, "In the case of a word like democracy, not only is there no agreed definition, but the attempt to make one is resisted from all sides. It is almost universally felt that when we call a country democratic we are praising it: consequently the defenders of every kind of regime claim that it is a democracy, and fear that they might have to stop using that word if it were tied down to any one meaning. Words of this kind are often used in a consciously dishonest way. That is, the person who uses them has his own private definition, but allows his hearer to think he means something quite different." - from "Politics and the English Language" - 1946
One might at least ask himself if the word "democracy" means the same thing to Rush as it means to Bill Clinton or Al Gore - or Mikhail Gorbachev. One might have nightmares from considering what Mikhail meant and still means by "Glasnost" and "Perestroika."
A website which provides a brief bio of Gorbachev states the following: "Gorbachev stands for what he calls ‘democratic socialism’ or ‘socialism with a human face’. " Interestingly, you will find similar elements of miscommunication and/or deception in the rhetoric of so-called Republicans as well as Democrats in Washington. But once you strip away all of the rhetoric and clearly define all of their terms you may find that the "democracy" of the Republicans and the Democrats in the US, once it is exported or forced down the throats of the rest of the world, may bear a striking resemblance to the Glasnost and Perestroika of Mr. Gorbachev.
Yes Rush, "Words Mean Things." Consider these words from the Bible as you contemplate your responsibility to warn and teach the American people regarding the inherent dangers of democracy: "For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?" - from I Corinthians 14:8
As much as we enjoy being entertained, we would rather be fully informed that we might both live and remain free. Democracies have always needed much more than a "Doctor."
To begin learning, or to have resources to teach your fellow citizens to become Champions of our Constitutionally Limited Republic rather than Doctors of Democracy, see the article linked below.
Rush has an awesome opportunity, but we each have the same responsibility to communicate the truth to our fellow citizens. Let’s get to work!
After you have studied this issue, e-mail Rush and ask him to post this article on his website. Until Rush has something better, I suggest he point his listeners to the Internet location below. In the cited article below, anyone with any doubt as to the importance of distinguishing between a Constitutional Republic and a Democracy will hopefully be fully awakened to this crucial distinction.
The scholarly treatment cited below was done by a man who left his career as a successful attorney to spend the rest of his life trying to show America how she was losing her true heritage as well as how to restore it. Rush Limbaugh should take a lesson from him. We certainly have.
For further study see excerpt "An Important Distinction: Democracy versus Republic."