Several talk shows have in recent days prefaced their hourly sessions on radio (and online) with quotes from various Woke Tranzi politicians.

They want to abolish at least the following institutions:

• the US presidency
• the US senate
• the US Supreme Court
• the Electoral College
• ICE (agency, not substance)
• the US military (well, technically “defund”)
• national borders
• prisons (“mostly”)

My oh my. That almost sounds like a libertarian, even an anarchist, wish list. No?

Of course, they add some other things:

• The US presidency would be replaced by a chief executive elected by the US House (see next item).
• The US House of Representatives would be expanded and become a “unicameral legislature.” That body would be elected by “democratic” means including both ranked-choice voting and proportional representation.
• The US Supreme Court would be replaced by some kind of grand tribunal appointed by and accountable to the unicameral legislature.
• Gradually, the largest American corporations and “essential industries” would be publicly owned (that is, government-owned) and “democratically” controlled (again, that is, “government-controlled”).

These recall the way the many failed (and failing) governments in various European nations (and the European Union itself) function. Once again, there are many libertarians that would agree with many of these actions.

We point out that we here at The Price of Liberty do not.

Of course, the various factions and politicians leading and controlling them do not fully agree on a good many other things. They might even quibble over some of these actions and how radical the changes, abolition, and replacements might be. Again, some examples:

• Would the “national legislature” still be elected by districts determined by States, or would some other method used to determine how the representatives are elected?
• Would the “president” be essentially a figurehead (as in Germany or Israel) with the real power resting in a “prime minister” (majority leader) of the legislature and a cabinet made up of representatives?
• What (if anything) would replace the US military? What or who would control it? What would pay for whatever was left?
• What would define “largest” American corporations? And “essential industries?” Most of the corporations that are “largest” are multi-national in nature regarding both ownership and management. And most are “publicly-traded” (meaning that you or I could buy a share in owning the company).

There are, of course, many more points that various and sundry politicians (both actual, self-proclaimed socialists and fellow-travelers) would disagree about. The DSA tries to brush over these, with their statement: “We believe that working people should run both the economy and civil society, and we show our commitment to this principle by being an organization of, by, and for the working class.”

We see this as pure propaganda. Who is the “working class” the DSA wants to run everything? How many of “We, the People” are excluded from that? Again, we can look at Russia, China, Cambodia, Cuba, Venezuela, and elsewhere. And what we see there should scare anyone.

But to the point, would this work better than the mess we have now? Or would be the same mess? Or a worse situation?

That is why we think that liberty is neither protected nor preserved, much less increased, by these proposals. Here are a few specific points:

• All of these ideas make government more powerful: perhaps shifting power from State (and even local) governments to a National, even unitary or central, government. Indeed, it might reduce the States to little more than administrative regions, totally under the thumb of the National government.
• These ideas make it easier for government – at least those in power – to quickly act. Even when that action is a result of panic or faddish fears and demands that “there oughta be a law” or “gotta do something!”
• That is done by concentrating power in the “unitary legislature” that would replace Congress, and its firmer control over the other two branches of government. As we have seen in Canada and the UK, the waning of power of the executive and judicial systems and functions leads to all kinds of abuses of power by that legislature and the permanent bureaucracy that runs everything in its name.
• These proposals do not address the fundamental problems with the current system of government in the States. Most notably, the incredible power which government has over our daily lives, the enormous cost and burden of taxation and regulations, and the massive corruption at all levels. Indeed, all of these are likely to increase (as demonstrated around the world and through history).

Again, there are many other points which can (and should) be addressed.

The US Constitution has serious flaws, and many far better writers have pointed out time and again. (Consider Boston T. Party and L. Neil Smith, as well as many others.) But when we compare it to the stated ideas, it is far more preferable. Yet these proposals, and their natural consequences, trash the constitution. These are not the fixes you are looking for.

What is? A topic for another commentary.