In the early 1970s and i think one of our challenges to think about what some of the consequences of those are and as kim said whether or not these are connected to each other. So, between about 1971 and 1976 and 1977 we first of all, get millions of new voters in this country, right . So you get a constitutional amendment that makes the voting age 18 instead of 21, so thats early in the 1970s. You also get a transformation of the primary system in this country, right . Prior to the 1970s, you had primary systems they were not binding primary systems so the primary system that we all experience that at times has caused the last five or ten years crises of its own, that is also birthed in the early 1970s. You begin to get a transformation that had already started in the 1960s, but comes to true you wigs wigs in the 1970s of the ways in which Congressional Committees are structureded. You get the break down of the old Congressional Committee structure, dominated largely by southern senat
Condolences to the community for the recent loss of a great lady and great scholar, ann, and id like to acknowledge, henry was a stall ward defender of American National sovereignty. I hope that he would have been pleased in presenting this award to me as pleased as i am in receiving it. Im going to proceed as follows. First, ill talk about what i call philadelphia sovereignty. Second, im going to examine the ideas of the Global Governance project which challenges philadelphia sovereignty, and third, move from ideas to action, and talk about the activities of the globalists, and then, fourth, examine the significance of the conflict between Constitutional Government and global govern nans. Now, sovereignty is define by most scholars and others as going back to 16 48, and thats true to an extent, but when i was working on the book and thinking of writing, coming up with concepts, i realized americans dont think of themselves as west americans think of sovereignty in the sense that we, t
[applause] it is hardly a secret the terms of political discourse are not exactly models of precision. Considering the way terms are used, it is next to impossible to try to give a meaningful answer to such questions as what is this socialism or capitalism or whats are back markets . That is even more true of the term anarchism as pointed out. It is a subject of varied use but also extreme of use sometimes by bitter enemies unfortunately by people hold the of manner high. So much so as the variation thats it resisted a simple characterization the only way i can see to redress some questioned what is anarchism is to identify the being ideas that animate and at least major currents of the rich and complex and often contradictory traditions of the anarchist thought and action. Of sensible approach can start with the remarks of to be the important manner of the intellectual i will quote rudolph rocker who sought anarchism not a fixed sullivan closed social system with a fixed the answer to
Temperament . Or for word. I think part of the reason is to offer a different intellectual history of ourselves. We define ourselves that way that the left just does not. Too often when the conservatives reached for intellectual history or philosophy they reach for the most radical version for the jeffersonian tail and we squeezed Abraham Lincoln into the story and it ends up being too radical about ourselves burke offers a different way to understand the liberal society. Achievement not a break but ameritech is the greatest achievement and not throwing away what key before but throw rigo way but made us so therefore as improves and grows it is not a radical process it requires conservative is a man and one of the lessons we could take from burke it has the engagement with policies that you had to fix problems before they got too big to invite radical solutions. That is how he worked in conservatives today should do more than that. That is my day job and this is why it is important to
Conservatism. I think one of the lessons we could take from burke is that in part the process involves an engagement with governing, with policy. Burke was reform. He thought you had to fix public problems before they get so big that they invite radical solutions. So he was interested in the details, the reflection of the revolution in france is full of statistics. You dont expect them but thats a we thought. Thats how they work. I think consumers today should do more of that. Id thats what i get my day job and this is why. I think its important for conservatives to be in job to be involved in governing. I think its also important for consumers to approach our society from a disposition of gratitude and care rather than to begin from a place of anger at whats being lost. Im angry about whats being lost. I think the left today is destructive for the american ideal and has too much power and is destroying the african ideal. I really do. But i think the solution of that, the way to persua