The following is a completed copy of “By Way of Introduction” from the Second Edition of The Work-Standard. It outlines an ongoing problem behind why there continues to be immense difficulties in trying to properly advocate for American Socialism under the US Constitution. And as stated in the new Preface, it lays the modus operandi behind how I am able to conceptualize Hamiltonian Federalist Socialism as an ideology in its own right.
The term “Socialism” continues to be the most profound topic within the political discourse in these United States of America. Its prevalence, its relevance surpasses that of another ubiquitous term, “Conservatism.” Everyone invokes the term with their own definitions and meanings. Everyone projects their most personal fears, anxieties, hopes, aspirations, hatred and love onto the word itself, oblivious to the inherent limitations of its applications. Is Socialism supposed to be a natural instinct or a technocratic bureaucracy? Is it the ongoing goal of Western Civilization or a temporary phase which allegedly ended in the so-called “Cold War?” Is it the same as Marxism (“Scientific Socialism”) or is it part of an older legacy that predates Marxism by several centuries?
These questions were never given any resolute answers throughout US History, nor has there been a satisfactory description of what Socialism is supposed to be. This difficulty in comprehending the form and actuality of a Pure Socialism by American Socialists and non-Socialists alike is the textbook definition of David Hume’s “Is/Ought Problem.” Barring the obvious interpretations provided by Marxists and Mormons, most conventional US definitions of Socialism focus more on what it ought to be than what it shall be. The same is also true for the myopic rhetoric peddled by Liberal Capitalists about America always being a “Liberal Capitalist regime,” presenting skewed distortions of historical realities in the American Way of Life. A genuinely authentic all-American Pure Socialism remains elusive because most everyday Americans, regardless of their own positions, simply do not know their own history.
The problem with implementing Pure Socialism in the US is far more fundamental than the petty, mundane affairs of “income inequality and wealth redistribution,” “gun rights and property rights,” “identity politics and social justice,” “taxes and spending,” “race and religion,” the “US National Debt and US Trade Deficits,” and the role of the Federal Government.” These issues, while understandably important for many, are not the real crux behind any serious attempt at implementing Pure Socialism. Everything depends on whether Pure Socialism resonates with the American Essence, the quintessential national essence of what it means for any US Citizen to be a ‘Real American.’ They must be prepared to testify before the Federal judge and jury at Federal court, under the possible penalty of perjury, that Socialism is enshrined in the Preamble of the US Constitution. That is because the old Federalist spirit and the contemporary attitudes of Conservatives and Socialists in the US share the same primordial point of origin in US History.
Pure Socialism, like the American Essence itself, is not a recent phenomenon. It predates the New Deal programs of the “Progressive Era,” the Muckrakers, Suffragettes, Old Progressives, and Temperance Movement of the “Gilded Era,” the Unionists and Confederates of the Civil War and the broader “Antebellum Era.” The primordial point of origin was in the Thirteen Colonies, the same Thirteen Colonies that were once subjects of the British Crown and later declared independence from the British Empire in the Revolutionary War. It was during the 18th Century that the American Essence gradually emerged, sowing the seeds of Pure Socialism and creating a distinct national identity that distinguishes the American people from the English-speaking world and why they have much more in common with the German-speaking world. These are incontrovertible historical facts, not literary figments or theoretical abstractions. Still, what significance is there for American Socialism having its origins in the Thirteen Colonies, the Revolutionary War, the Constitution, the Federalists and Anti-Federalists? But more importantly, is there any meaning to be ascribed to why the American Essence is a contradictory fusion of British and German cultural attitudes and social behaviors?
The cultural, traditional, lingual, and even spiritual foundations of the Thirteen Colonies are predominantly British and German (or, more precisely, English and Prussian) in origin. One cannot begin to appreciate the American Way of Life without developing an acute self-awareness of their presences and opposing visions of America. There is an important chapter in an immigration-related document from the US Library of Congress that alludes to the American Essence being a synthesis of the German and British Essences. The whole transcript reads:
“By the middle of the 18th century, German immigrants occupied a central place in American life. Germans accounted for one-third of the population of the American colonies, and were second in number only to the English. The German language was widely spoken in nearly every colonial city and was circulated in locally published periodicals and books. When the members of the Continental Congress first met in Philadelphia, they walked down streets lined with German businesses sporting German signs, and their deliberations were reported in German broadsides and debated in German coffeehouses. When the Declaration of Independence was signed on July 4, 1776, a German newspaper was the first to break the news, and German copies of the Declaration were on the streets the next day.
The strength and vitality of German publishing was one of the cornerstones of German culture in America, and one of the reasons for its tremendous success. Since Johannes Gutenberg invented movable type in 1440, Germans had been at the forefront of the printing industry in Europe, and they carried this tradition with them to the American colonies. The first Bible in America was published in German by Christopher Saur, a German printer in Philadelphia. By the time of the American Revolution, most of the cities and large towns in the colonies supported at least one German newspaper, and some had two. German newspapers, broadsides, almanacs, and books became the glue that held the German American community together, and helped maintain a sense of social cohesion among immigrants that were scattered widely up and down the eastern seaboard, in bustling cities and in remote farm settlements. This cultural glue held its force for hundreds of years, and reinforced German Americans’ identity well into the 20th century.
The military traditions of German-speaking immigrants also made a significant contribution to revolutionary America. At the outbreak of the Revolutionary War, Germans from all over the American colonies formed volunteer militia companies. General Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben, who had served as a general staff officer with the Prussian army, volunteered to serve General George Washington without pay and was put to work organizing and drilling the sometimes ragged volunteers of the Continental Army. Von Steuben’s Prussian discipline and tactics were to a large degree responsible for the Revolutionists’ later military victories, and his manual of regulations formed the basis of the manual of drill and organization used by the United States Army today.”
At the heart of the American Essence lies the “English-Prussian Dialectic,” the American Way of Life as the centuries-old synthesis of the “English Instinct” and the “Prussian Instinct.” The Work-Standard supports a long-standing historical argument about the origins of Capitalism and Socialism, insofar as these two terms are commonly understood by political scientists and economists, being England and Prussia in the wake of the Protestant Reformation. The exact timeframe in which both countries conceptualized Capitalism and Socialism, interestingly enough, coincides neatly with the arrival of European settlers on America’s shores. The English precursor to Capitalism was “Mercantilism,” whereas the Prussian precursor to Socialism was “Cameralism.” This is an important consideration because The Work-Standard has gone to great lengths to verify the veracity of this argument–especially the Prussian origins of Socialism, with entire Entries devoted to investigating the political and economic policies of various Socialist nation-states and finding similarities between them and Prussia.
The English-Prussian Dialectic deems all economic life as the extension of all political life. Its premise pertains to a question of power, particularly the powers wielded by an Individual and those wielded by the People. In essence, either the real powers of the US belong to an Individual or else they belong to the People, the State Governments or the Federal Government. Nothing about the English-Prussian Dialectic should be considered too unusual or even out of the ordinary insofar as these tendencies have shaped and molded America into its own sovereign nation.
US History contains various instances where the Prussian half of the American Essence shaped the American Way of Life in a distinctly German pattern. They are important staples in the everyday lives of most Americans, unaware of their historical origins or why these historical facts are relevant to the conceptualization of Pure Socialism. Three examples stand out:
There is the US Electoral College, which has its origins in the German Electoral College. Just as the US Electoral College serves alongside the US Congress by fulfilling the role of electing the next President of the United States, the German Electoral College had a similar role of electing the Kaiser of the German Reich on behalf of the legislative body called the Reichstag. In the German electoral process, the Catholic Pope coronates the Kaiser in an official inauguration. The American version differs by having the American People coronate the President instead of His Holiness.
The highly-stratified, hierarchical social structures of these United States are reminiscent of those found in the German Reich. There was a delineation between the “Reich Government,” the “State Governments,” and the “Municipal Governments” German Reich, the characteristics of which were partially replicated in the US. One notable instance includes the known inclinations toward the provision of autonomy to US States and German States. US States are capable of joining and participating in Compacts under the US Constitution and the Federal Government is able to own and operate Federal lands independent of those owned by the States. Similarly, German States had similar equivalents called the “Städtebünde” (Band of Cities) such as the Hanseatic League or the Lusatian League, while accommodations were made for certain areas to fall under the authority of the Reich Government under the “Reichsunmittelbarkeit” (Reich Immediacy).
The eastward expansion of the German Reich, the Ostsiedlung (Eastward Settlement), was later replicated in these United States as the westward expansion of the Union beyond the initial Thirteen Colonies. The American “Westsiedlung” (Westward Settlement), originally begun by the British under the “Royal Proclamation of 1763,” was later repurposed by the US to mark its initial western border along the Mississippi River like an “American Rhine.” This was the result of the Seven-Years War, otherwise known in US History as the “French and Indian War,” and also the same conflict that Prussia fought and emerged victorious as a major European power.
Furthermore, and perhaps unbeknownst to some Americans of all ideological persuasions, the English-Prussian Dialectic exists across a vast variety of political, economic, social, cultural, technological and financial topics. These topics cannot be neatly framed along the Left-Right Political Spectrum as being “Leftist,” “Rightist,” or “Centrist.” They can be traced back to the US Constitution being a Living Document that is best interpreted with the Founder’s Intent in mind. Here are some timeless questions worthy to consider as one reads The Work-Standard:
- Is the American Way of Life a Pursuit of Temporary Happiness or a Pursuit of Eternal Glory?
- Is Pure Socialism enshrined in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights or its Preamble?
- Is the United States Congress a Representative Parliament or a Delegative Council?
- Is political life defined by an Electoral College of “State-Electors” or “Federal-Electors?”
- Is economic life defined by “Planned Economy” or “Command Economy?”
- Is social life defined by “Blood and Wealth” or “Rank and Achievement?”
- Are Property Rights defined by “Private Property” or “Productive Property?”
- Shall the US Currency be the “United States Dollar” or the “United States Note?”
- Shall US Education be defined by a “Federal Education” (religious education is part of the curriculum) or “State Education” (religious education is absent from the curriculum)?
- And which powers shall be delegated by the State Government and which powers shall be delegated by the Federal Government?
Although these questions are related to specific Entries throughout The Work-Standard, all of which are addressed in a generalized manner in order to demonstrate the feasibility of the Work-Standard for non-Western nations, they will be revisited again in the final Entries. The final Entries offer detailed summarizations of everything discussed elsewhere in the treatise, where questions related to the constitutionality of the Work-Standard will also be addressed. For now, the formal conceptualization of Pure Socialism in America, its formal Political Science taxonomy, its prominent influences and contributors of American Socialism, is the next topic of discussion.