Upon discovering a crucial error in the book Heritage Studies by Eileen Berry, I contacted the publisher BJU Press in order to report it. I informed the publisher that the author incorrectly refers to the offices of government in Washington, D.C., as representing the “national government.” I advised that this term is incorrect, as the Founding Fathers of the United States described the form of government primarily as the “general government” or, otherwise, as the “federal government” or “central government.” I stressed that this is not merely a matter of semantics but a critically important distinction, as it represents the critical attitudes and apprehensions at the time of America’s founding, as well as the intentional preservation of sovereignty among each of the several states in the Union — states recognized as independent at the signing of the Treaty of Paris, states which affirmed their sovereignty in their very ratification of the Constitution, and states whose sov...
Over the course of President Trump’s two terms, there has been much talk around the matter of tariffs — taxes on imported goods. However, much of the talk seems to miss the point. After all, for those of us who seek the truth, it’s not really a question of whether tariffs are ‘good’ but whether they are preferable to other kinds of taxes — assuming, of course, that taxes are the rule, as certain as the eventuality of death. First, let’s establish the theory: beyond the generic purpose of revenue generation for the state, the institution of tariffs ordinarily serves to reduce (or discourage) imports by making them artificially more expensive, while encouraging domestic production by making domestic products more appealing on a relative price basis. In the realm of foreign affairs, tariffs are instituted or threatened in the course of international trade negotiations in order to signal dissatisfaction with existing trade barriers and to push for more favorable trade terms; or in ord...