[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 4]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 6068-6069]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                            CLOSER TO EMPIRE

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. RON PAUL

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, March 25, 1999

  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I rise again today to consider the effect of 
our current actions in Kosovo, but this time I do not wish to address 
the folly of war, for attempts to prevent war measures against that 
nation are now futile. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to address a long term 
concern, a problem larger even than war. I am referring to the folly of 
empire.
  Our involvement in Kosovo and in Iraq, and in Bosnia--when combined 
with America's role in Korea, and in the Middle East and other places 
around the world, is now lurching our republic ever closer to empire. 
Empire is something that all Americans ought to oppose.
  I remind those who believe in the Judeo-Christian tradition that 
opposition to empire is to be found in the warnings found in the book 
of Ezekiel, warnings against the empowerment of a king. And it is this 
same principle which is evident in the story of the Tower of Babel, and 
in that admonition of Christ, which reminds that those things which are 
of Caesar are not of God.
  To pragmatists, agnostics and such, I point to the decline and fall 
which has historically attended every other empire. The Ottomans and 
Romans, the Spanish and the British, all who have tried empire have 
faltered, and at great costs to their own nations.
  Mr. Speaker, to liberals I would remind that these interventions, 
however well-intended they may be, all require the use of forces of 
occupation, and this is the key step toward colonialism, itself always 
leading to subjugation and to oppression.
  To conservatives, I want to recall the founding of our Republic, our 
nation's breaking from the yoke of empire in order that we might 
realize the benefits of liberty and self-determination, and that we 
might obtain the blessings that flow naturally from limitations on 
centralized power. Empire reflecting the most perfect means yet devised 
to concentrate power in the fewest hands.
  Now, Mr. Speaker, our own nation faces a choice and we may well be at 
the very precipice. Indeed, to move even one step further down the road 
to empire may mean that there will be no turning back short of the 
eventual decline and fall. Will we act now to restore our Republic?
  It is oft repeated that we do not realize the import of our most 
critical actions at the time that we begin to undertake them. How true, 
Mr. Speaker, this statement is. Were Mr. Townshend, or the King in 
England the least contemplative of the true cost which would eventuate 
as a result of the tea tax or the stamp act?
  Now we must ask, is our nation on the verge of empire? Some will say 
no, because, they say, we do not seek to have direct control over the 
governments of foreign lands, but how close are we to doing just that? 
And is it so important whether the dictates of empire come from the 
head of our government or from the Secretary General of some 
multilateral entity which we direct?
  Today we attempt, directly or indirectly, to dictate to other 
sovereign nations who they ought and ought not have as leader, which 
peace accords they should sign, and what form of governments they must 
enact. How limited is the distinction between our actions today and 
those of the emperors of history? How limited indeed. In fact, one 
might suggest that this is a distinction without a substantive 
difference.
  And where now are we willing to commit troops and under what 
conditions? If we are to stop all violations of human rights, what will 
we do of Cuba, which recently announced new crackdowns?
  And what of communist China? Not only do they steal our secrets, but 
they violate their

[[Page 6069]]

own citizens. Who should be more upset, for example, about forced 
abortion? Is it those who proclaim the inviolable right to life or 
those who argue for so-called reproductive rights? Even these polar 
opposites recognize the crimes of the Chinese government in forced 
abortion. Should we then stop this oppression of millions? Are we 
committed to lob missiles at this massive nation until it ceases this 
program?
  Will the principle upon which we are now claiming to act lead us to 
impose our political solutions upon the nations that now contain Tibet, 
and Kurdistan, and should the sentiment rear, even Quebec and Chechnya?
  The most dangerous thing about where we are headed is our lack of 
historical memory and our disastrous inattention to the effect of the 
principles upon which we act, for ideas do indeed have consequences, 
Mr. Speaker, and they pick up a momentum that becomes all their own.
  I do believe that we are on the brink, Mr. Speaker, but it is not yet 
too late. Soon I fear the train, as it is said, will have left the 
station. We stand on the verge of crossing that line that so firmly 
distinguishes empire from republic. This occurs not so much by an 
action or series of actions but by the acceptance of an idea, the idea 
that we have a right, a duty, an obligation, or a national interest to 
perfect foreign nations even while we remain less than principled 
ourselves.
  When will we, as a people and as an institution, say ``we choose to 
keep our republic, your designs for empire interest us not in the 
least.'' I can only hope it will be soon, for it is my sincerest fear 
that failing to do so much longer will put us beyond this great divide.

                          ____________________