Democracy Isn’t Sufficient to Protect Liberty

In this country, we are at an ideological turning point. Many people have begun to substitute the term democracy for liberty. These two terms are often conflated because democracy is a natural component of liberty. You cannot have liberty without some form of democracy. That is why democrats have sought to “democratize” the Supreme Court of the United States.

However, democracy alone is not enough to preserve our liberty. The French learned this in their revolution of 1789. The revolutionaries decided to create a National Convention, which gave suffrage to all males and was democratically elected. Unlike our Founding Fathers, they believed that their freedoms were secure, because the government was in the hands of the people. 

 Unfortunately, following the insecurities at home and abroad, the National Convention voted to create the Committee for Public Safety to govern France. Because there was no separation of powers, this group took complete control of the country and executed 17,000 of its political enemies. Pure democracy actually led to the downfall of the people because they voted to put themselves and their opponents in shackles. There was no Constitution or courts to stop them from trammelling on the rights of the people.

A similar phenomenon is happening today in Portland, Oregon. Democracy is certainly working there. The people have their say. So much so that the majority can run around burning the property of citizens and even assaulting them and elected officials will do absolutely nothing.

In fact, right now a woman named Sarah Iannarone is leading Ted Wheeler by 11 points in the Portland mayoral race. She was photographed wearing a skirt with images of the communist revolutionaries Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong and Che Guevara. If elected, she would actively encourage the violence to continue. Is it justified because she was democratically elected? I don’t think so.

A republic requires more safeguards to liberty than mere democracy. People can be fooled by tyrants and freedom is always one generation away from extinction. The founders recognized this and  realized that for the rights of all men to be protected, there must be limitations on the powers of government, even if that same government is elected by the people.

From their incisive vision for America, we have inherited one of the greatest bastions of freedom ever created; The Supreme Court of the United States. This institution was founded to prevent the gross excesses of government from infringing on the rights of the people. It is this court that prevents religion and speech from being controlled by the government.

Despite this fact, Democrats have threatened to pack the court if Amy Coney Barrett is elected to the Supreme Court. Kamala Harris, Amy Klobuchar, Cory Booker, Chuck Schumer, Elizabeth Warren, and AOC have all said that the idea of court packing should be “explored.” Unfortunately, they don’t realize that the Supreme Court is not an outdated tradition. It is necessary for the preservation of a free and open society.

The fact that Mr. Biden has failed to disavow “court packing” is probably the most disturbing position that has been taken by a candidate in this election. As has been shown by history and our experiences with the failing city of Portland, democracy is not a sufficient safeguard for liberty. The Justices of the Supreme Court are not supposed to be beholden to the majority of the people. They are beholden to the God-given rights of every individual which are outlined in the Constitution.