No More Czars, Please

Since America may be getting a Car Czar, this excerpt from the October 2004 issue of The Freeman seems particularly prescient:

Excerpted from “No More Czars, Please” by Lawrence W. Reed
Download PDF version

In the land of the free, czardom has become a bipartisan fetish. Both major political parties have given us drug czars, energy czars, trade czars, AIDS czars, counterterrorism czars, and more, and they seem intent on blessing us with more such coronations in the future. We now even have a federal “privacy czar,” for crying out loud! The politi- cians give us tough talk about getting some problem resolved, but when they anoint a czar to deal with it, it’s usually because they don’t know what should be done or they’re afraid to accept responsibility themselves.

The media not only lap it up, but they dish out more of their own—often conferring the “czar” title on officials whom even the gov- ernment isn’t brash enough to label that way. While browsing the Internet, I came across an article from the January 20 Berkeley Daily Planet with a headline that caught my eye: “Bush Homeless Czar Pays a Visit.”

It wasn’t about a government official without a home. It was about the President’s homelessness czar, in town to promote “the development of 10-year plans to end chronic homelessness.” Other stories I found referred to a “timber czar,” a “cybersecurity czar,” a “health care czar,” and a “regulatory czar,” to cite but a few examples.

My problem with all of this goes beyond the notion of hiring yet another bureaucrat. It’s the use of the term “czar” itself to refer to anybody at all in what is supposed to be a free society. Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, and the others who risked their lives to fash- ion a constitutional republic must be turning in their graves. Just as George Washington rejected a suggestion he be named a king, so should any self-respecting, freedom-loving American citizen eschew any offer to be a “czar” over anything or anybody.

In his book Freedom in Chains: The Rise of the State and the Demise of the Citizen, James Bovard laments what this czarist fetish says about the state of American thinking: “Americans of earlier generations would be as shocked by the current adula- tory use of the term ‘czar’ as contemporary Americans should be shocked of the use of ‘fuehrer’ as a compliment for a political leader.” Bovard cites an attorney who, in an 1895 case, condemned a particular tax as granting sweeping powers to the federal gov- ernment “worthy of a Czar of Russia proposing to reign with undisputed and absolute power. . . .”

The origin of the word is “Caesar” from the ancient Roman autocrat Julius Caesar, who arrogated great power to himself and helped bring an end to the Roman republic. Later emperors embraced his name as their title; to be a “Caesar” was to possess almost limitless, life-and-death authority over the rest of society. In more modern times we think of a “czar” as a tyrant of pre-1917 Russia. Look it up in any thesaurus and you’ll find synonyms such as “usurper,” “despot” and “oppressor.”

Words say a lot about a culture. Americans of 1900 never referred to one of their own as a “czar” because they understood the term. Because they generally embraced liberty and limited government, they knew that it was pejorative. No respectable American of that day would have accepted the title, and no job at any level of government at that time even pretended to bestow czarist-like authority. Americans of today haven’t forgotten what the term means.

Sadly, they simply put far more faith in powerful, centralized government than did their ancestors. Their acceptance of the term “czar” is symptomatic of the same shift in thinking that has given us a government that commands a share of our lives and personal income many times what it claimed in 1900.

One hopeful sign of the prospects for liberty would be a widespread revulsion at the very thought of a fellow citizen possessing either a position or a title such as the one we’re discussing here. Let’s pray for the day when Americans tell their leaders in no uncertain terms: “Give us no more czars! Give us no pharaohs, emperors, shoguns, sheikhs, sachems, commissars, or potentates of any kind! Just give us good and limited government, and leave the rest to us!”

Comments

• Login

  Username:
  

  Password:
  

  Remember me

  • Register
  • Lost your password?

• Categories

  • a la carte
  • Admin
  • American Revolution
  • Article
  • Bailout
  • Big Three
  • Bill of Rights
  • Blog post
  • Book
  • Budget Deficit
  • Business Cycle
  • Corporatism
  • Credit Crunch
  • Debate
  • Deflation
  • Democracy
  • Detroit
  • Economics 101
  • Education
  • Environment
  • Essay
  • Federal Reserve
  • FEE
  • Free Market
  • George W. Bush
  • Global Warming
  • government
  • Great Depression
  • Gun Rights
  • health care
  • Henry Hazlitt
  • Industrial Policy
  • Inflation
  • Keynes
  • Law
  • Legislation
  • Libertarianism
  • Madoff Case
  • Magazine
  • New Deal
  • News
  • Op-ed
  • Paternalism
  • Paul Krugman
  • Politics
  • Q&A
  • Quotation
  • Regulation
  • Saving
  • Second Amendment
  • Speech
  • Stimulus
  • Talking Heads
  • Taxation
  • Taxpayers
  • Television
  • TGIF
  • The Freeman
  • Too Big to Fail
  • Uncategorized
  • Video
  • Virtue

• Blogroll

  • Against Monopoly
  • Cafe Hayek
  • Division of Labour
  • EconoLog
  • Free Association
  • Heroes of Capitalism
  • Knowledge Problem
  • Liberty and Power
  • Marginal Revolution
  • Orgs and Markets
  • The Austrian Economists
  • The Beacon (Independent Inst.)
  • The Economic Way of Thinking
  • ThinkMarkets

• Enter your email address:

  Delivered by FeedBurner

• Recent Comments

  • Speedmaster: Indeed! I posted about this last night as well. Bootleggers and Baptists: Wal-Mart and Forced Coverage
  • scott: i don’t care about what they do with health care, as long as I can practice alternative medicine...
  • gail lightfoot: I gave some thought to ‘buying American’ because it seemed to make some sense not to ship...
  • gail lightfoot: Well done! Sheldon. Of course, I expect no less than the best from you. : )
  • Brian: Great comment. As usual, Mr. Richman is right on the mark. It is particularly galling to see Obama, Dodd and...
  • Brian: Wow. Todd – nice rant. Really, I love it! You hit all the free market points and I don’t disagree...
  • ToddAndrewBarnett: Mike: Excellent blog on Rove’s dull, ill-written piece in the Journal. After reading that...

• Tags

  Austrian Business Cycle Theory Austrian Economics Auto Industry Bailout Bailouts banking crisis Barack Obama Big Government Big Three Capitalism congress Corporatism Credit Crunch Deficit Spending Deregulation Detroit Economics Economy Education Federal Reserve Free Market Government Spending Great Depression healthcare Henry Hazlitt Henry Paulson housing bubble Inflation Keynes Keynesian Economics Lawrence W. Reed Libertarianism Paul Krugman Politics Recession Regulation Robert Higgs Saving Socialized Medicine Stimulus Stimulus Package subprime The Freeman Unions Video

• Recent Posts

  • TGIF: Congress Declares Independence
  • Walmart Unmasked
  • Happy Independence Day!
  • The Energy Bill: Read It and Get Angry
  • TGIF: The Misrepresentation of Healthcare Reform