because the contest is hard, treacherous, and risky? In thengame of survival, second places often do not count. Wherenare the Armenians today? Or Dacians? Or Burgundians? Orneven the European Jews?nFor the soft, the record of oppression by the weak shouldnsuffice—mob rule in the French Revolution, Soviet RednTerror, the Cambodian self-genocide, to go no further. Inncomparison, imperial strength has often brought peace,nprosperity, pride, and civilization to those areas and timesnthat have produced anything of value. Pax Romana gave usnEurope, while Byzantium, the Holy Roman Empire, andnthe Austro-Hungarian Empire preserved it. In GenghisnKhan’s description of supreme joy (” . . . to cut my enemiesnto pieces, drive them before me, seize their possessions,nwitness the tears of those dear to them, and embracentheir wives and daughters”) lies an indication of what thenfrontiersmen of European Empires saved us from. Today,nthe Frontiers are shrinking towards the City on the Hill, asnin Emperor Constantine Dragases’ time, or before Chalonsnbecame a victory.nIn their Hamletizing over empire, Americans are torturednwith the specter of a loss of freedom. Can those whonlay down the law themselves be free, seems to be thenquestion, and the answer, in many Americans’ minds,nseems to be negative. It has often been said that freedomndoes not involve license, and most philosophers (includingnHegel), have perceived it as strength arising from thenobligation to truth. A sturdy, hierarchical, responsiblenAmerica might be freer than today’s U.S.—freer from thenwhims of over 50 percent of its citizens who don’t bother tonvote, and from the hang-ups of those who use theirnfranchise only to satirize, blaspheme, or destroy. In mostnIn the forthcoming issue of Chronicles:nRestoring the Constitutionn”An evolutionary Constitution implies a path of evolution,neither inevitable or actively pursued. But who is tondiscern the path? The Supreme Court of the later 19thncentury thought the path was illuminated by HerbertnSpencer—more recently egalitarian social democracy hasnbeen the beacon. In either case we have a guardian classnof savants privileged to lead the way. The status of suchnmen rests not on talents or public services, but on claimsnto special revelation. In other words, they are not republicanndelegates of the people but priestly oracles—what thenFounding Fathers would have immediately seen to benclever usurpers, and to us hardly distinguishable from thenvanguard of the proletariat.”n10 I CHRONICLESn—from “What the Founders Didn’t Count On”nby Clyde WilsonnnnEuropean democracies, the choice involved trusting particularnmen to keep the community viable and vigorous—thendecisions of New England town meetings were bindingneven for dissenters. During the Civil War, supporters of thenConfederacy or slavery in the North were imprisoned,nsometimes shot—no Jane Fondas toured the enemy andncashed in on it. In the American West, vigilance committeesnenforced the will of the majority, to the detriment ofnanyone who would not abide by it. An America able to reactnboth to the gadflies and the dragons would be honorable innits willingness to pay for what it wants.nThere is yet to be invented a social or a political ordernwhich will satisfy everyone. Until the late 19th century thenAmerican Nation meant a Germano-Celtic, Englishspeakingnpeople, not merely an inhabited continent. Thenworld is large, and America can be a point of departure, asnwell as a port of destination—let others try with “culturalnmosaics,” multilingualism, and cultural and religious disintegration.nAmerica should continue providing a chance tonimmigrants of its choice, able to become Americans, butnthere is no reason why it should be a haven for newcomersnunwilling to adapt. Such magnanimity will only delight thenenemies of this land and enable every pressure group in thenworld to take its place as a well-paying influence onnAmerican policy. When the rest of this planet has become anUnited Nations, it will be time enough for Americans tonfollow suit.nThis country is an empire because a continent of close ton300 million people cannot behave as a village assembly andnsurvive. There will never be a technology to changenthis—either Americans will manage their estate accordingnto its nature, or be challenged by others more than willingnto try. Gorbachev, for one, would be delighted to show thenAmericans how to run their agriculture, industry, andnpolitics; but he would have to get in line with OlivernTambo, Daniel Ortega, and Yassir Arafat. After 200 years,nthis republic has no reason to prove anything. If effortnmeans the lack of freedom, instead of a precondition for it,nthen Americans have ceased being free since the firstnEuropeans came here.nAmerica, the envy of the world, is also its only hope. It isnnot an unblemished hope, but what are the alternatives?nUlster? Valon-Flemish rivalry? The sanatoriums of Switzerland?nFrench posturing? Italian auto-subversion? ThirdnWorld New Information Order? Mike Gorbachev’s Afghanistan?nChinese Truths, Leaps, and Pratfalls? PerpetualnWhite Man’s self-flagellation? Are Americans to renouncenthemselves because a food chain exists?nAs a foreigner (“legal alien” in exact terms), I wish tonbecome an American because, after living in much of thisnworld, I know that the only battie worth fighting, in this daynand age, is right here, in America. In Kuwait, I was asked tonstay and witness the eventual removal of the chadohr; innIran, they spoke to me of revolution; in Peru, I wasnpromised money that I never lacked; in my native Yugoslavia,nI was expected to wait for what the Austrians had wonnover a century ago—but I wanted to see the whole of thisnspeck in space go somewhere, and I chose America. IfnAmerica flubs it, the crime will be much greater thannself-destruction; a world will be orphaned, before it isndestroyed.n