Here we go again

Just when several of the contenders -- I use the term loosely -- have dropped out of the presidential race and you would expect a return to the dignity and decorum that should define the office of the presidency ... all h-e-double k breaks loose with renewed and revitalized vigor.

With the fragmentation of both parties -- or so it appears -- it might be time to think about reviving the old Whig party. Or, if not that, go back to the old "smoke-filled rooms" where so many decisions were fought out or cranked out or seemingly arrived at.

When you have an evolving socialist and a self-affirmed socialist competing for the top spot on one ticket, it bares having an nth degree of concern for the future of our republic.

What is tragic, I wager, is the great number of our citizens, particularly the young, who have no apparent concept of what socialism really is or what its consequences could be, consequences that have befallen every government which has attempted to foster that form of government. More later on that topic.

Also, when candidates of another party stand in front of a lectern and call each other liars and when one hints or says broadly a former president should have been impeached, it bears serious contemplation that it may be time to require every candidate to complete a course outlining dignity, decorum and professional courtesy before he or she could utter a word.

Unfortunately, I'd wager a return to the principled rules of such respect would be as hard or harder to attain as having me sink a three-pointer from mid-court. Now, it's more like double dribbling, bumping and elbowing on both sides of the center line as exemplified on main streets, in schools, sometimes in churches and even in family homes.

The lack of respect during basic interchange of opinions is best exemplified on the talk and so-called news shows on the boob tube. Every talking "head," from the moderator or host to the wanna-be expert being interviewed, or the panelists themselves, violate a first rule: Using his or her head. Simple? Interruption is the name of the game, that and talking the loudest and fastest with the most vindictive inflections with ever-rising stretch of vocal cords.

There. I guess we all, or at least some of us, are so indoctrinated with a degree of what type of behavior that we/I probably/possibly/sometimes fall into that old "me, my, I" trap that drives many conversations during exchange of ideas.

Enough of this. Earlier I promised more on the subject of socialism which was defined perfectly by an Austrian economist who wrote a book during the earliest days of World War II. I have referred, several times, to Fredrich von Hayek, whose book, "The Road to Serfdom," detailed how a society or government can fall into a trap that inevitably leads to socialism. That trap is baited with all the goodies promoted through "progressive" plans sold under the guise of creating regulations and planning coupled with entitlements and benefits.

Hayek outlined such actions which are expected to create a more equal society of subjects with a so-called "chicken in every pot" and "good times for all."

His treatise pointed out that all such promises and actions are suggested as being ways to bring society together and, at the start, are suggested by promoters who visualize, in all innocence, that everything will be better for everyone. At that point, the result is not socialism but, without careful monitoring and restraints, more government direction of individual liberties is sure to follow.

As the drift continues, it is very appealing and remains so until a point of irreversible semi-governmental "dictatorship" has arrived and reality finally dawns on what has evolved -- sometimes over a period of many years. It is then, in most countries which have succumbed to the progressive drift, the result at first is protests, expanding to demonstrations which lead to riots and violence, and sometimes result in overthrow of governments or, even worse, enactment of even more dictatorial decisions of the governing body. Such actions are in various progressive stages in several countries of the world at this time.

Fortunately, our American forefathers created a multilevel republic, which we call a democracy, comprised of three branches, executive, legislative and judicial. When all are working properly under constitutional restraints, the system works, sometimes with bumps. As time has passed, moral values have changed and our culture has evolved. Our American system has utilized wisely our check-balance system. This has been fostered because citizens have respected and protected the system which protects individual freedoms.

The system, which always evolves, seems sometimes to move very slowly toward a creeping intrusion of government in many areas. It is then a reality check must occur to nurture that which rebuilds respect.

Hayek was quick to point out that in free societies, such as ours, as long as individual liberty is maintained, when self-reliance and pride and an individual work ethic are maintained, the drift toward socialism is controlled or slowed by the very society which is involved. This must incorporate the efforts of everyone, particularly of the upcoming, future-governing generation.

Which leads to this very pointed question: Where are we now?

Dodie Evans is the former editor and long-time owner of the Gravette News Herald. Opinions expressed are those of the author.