Divide et Impera

"Posterity, you will never know how much it cost the present generation to preserve your freedom. I hope you will make good use of it. If you do not, I shall repent in heaven that ever I took half the pains to preserve it." - John Adams

"Even mighty states and kingdoms are not exempted. If we look into history, we shall find some nations rising from contemptible beginnings and spreading their influence, until the whole globe is subjected to their ways. When they have reached the summit of grandeur, some minute and unsuspected cause commonly affects their ruin, and the empire of the world is transferred to some other place. Immortal Rome was at first but an insignificant village, inhabited only by a few abandoned ruffians, but by degrees it rose to a stupendous height, and excelled in arts and arms all the nations that preceded it. But the demolition of Carthage (what one should think should have established it in supreme dominion) by removing all danger, suffered it to sink into debauchery, and made it at length an easy prey to Barbarians.

England immediately upon this began to increase (the particular and minute cause of which I am not historian enough to trace) in power and magnificence, and is now the greatest nation upon the globe.

Soon after the Reformation a few people came over into the new world for conscience sake. Perhaps this (apparently) trivial incident may transfer the great seat of empire into America. It looks likely to me. For if we can remove the turbulent Gallics, our people according to exactest computations, will in another century, become more numerous than England itself. Should this be the case, since we have (I may say) all the naval stores of the nation in our hands, it will be easy to obtain the mastery of the seas, and then the united force of all Europe, will not be able to subdue us. The only way to keep us from setting up for ourselves is to disunite us. Divide et impera. Keep us in distinct colonies, and then, some great men in each colony, desiring the monarchy of the whole, they will destroy each others' influence and keep the country in equilibrio.

Be not surprised that I am turned politician. The whole town is immersed in politics."

-David McCullough, quoting a letter John Adams wrote to Nathan Webb, Dated Oct. 12, 1755

I'm currently reading David McCullough's masterpiece biography on John Adams, the second President of the United States, and I came across this passage on pages 39 and 40 of the edition I was given. I've bolded certain passages because, the more I study this book, and the more I look at our current situation, the more this makes sense to me.

Adams, in writing this passage is, in a way, lamenting the "empire" structure of the world, while at the same time trying to show the United States how to avoid such a downfall. Now, 253 years later, the United States stands as the lone superpower on the world stage, but China and India are trying to gain ground, and Putin is doing all he can to return Russia to their former glory.

Russia sought imperial dominion by uniting under a single leader, or by having the tyranny of a singular governmental head thrust upon them. As John Adams points out, this flaw is a vital cog in the machine that tears down nations. As he writes, "The only way to keep us from setting up for ourselves is to disunite us. Divide et impera. Keep us in distinct colonies, and then, some great men in each colony, desiring the monarchy of the whole, they will destroy each others' influence and keep the country in equilibrio."

By maintaining individual colonies (they would later become states), Adams claimed that the balance of power would remain and no single individual would rise to such a lofty, prominent position that it would endanger the nation as a whole. Sadly, the current form of the United States Government no longer reflects what Adams had in mind, and it all stems from a single Constitutional amendment.

The 17th Amendment, which passed through the Senate on June 12, 1911, essentially repealed part of Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution and provided for the common, popular election of Senators, something that was once done by the state legislative bodies, giving both the people and the state governments a voice in the federal system. By eliminating the voice of the state governments, the people were, for all intents and purposes, brought under the singular head of the federal government.

John Adams wrote that, and this is paraphrased, the nation would fall if we united. I know that it sounds completely contradictory, and that we've always heard the saying "United we stand, divided we fall." According to Adams, at least where politics is concerned, the truth is the antithesis of that cliche. If we unite under a single banner, we are more likely to fall, because the likelihood of powerful politic figures offsetting each other becomes an outside possibility. Under the old system, pre-1911, the nation stood as a true collective of states.

When the 17th Amendment was ratified, the power of the State governments, in comparison to the strength of the federal government, was greatly diminished. With the state governments having lost their voice in Washington, it seems, at least at the federal level, that the concept of states is merely a formality.

If you haven't read John Adams by David McCullough, or at least seen the HBO miniseries presentation, then do so as soon as possible. And also, I implore you, consider what is happening in this country. John Adams was no prophet, but he was far ahead of his time when it came to political thinking. In fact, reading his early writings, I have to say that he may very well be my hero. Robert once told me that his political ideals came about from watching archive footage of FDR. I think I'm finally finding my political hero in John Adams. He was brilliant, and though he passed on long ago, his knowledge is something that all politicians would do well to institute in their own lives today.