Any sensible person can see that there is something seriously wrong with many American universities.
For several decades many of our most prestigious seats of learning have become hostile to free speech and genuine inquiry. Speech codes have been introduced to prevent so-called ‘micro aggressions’.
Speakers that do not subscribe to ‘woke’ orthodoxies have been ‘de-platformed’. Those that do get invited on to campus risk being mobbed, as recently happened to a federal judge at Stanford and Riley Gaines at San Francisco State
Intellectual inquiry, too, has narrowed. Anyone presenting ideas outside the approved parameters risks having their career terminated. (See what happened to Harvard’s then President, Larry Summers, in 2006 when he suggested that genetics might help explain why there are more male than female scientists.)
Then on October 7th, Hamas slaughtered over a thousand Israelis, most of them civilians. Far from condemning the massacre, student groups at Harvard, Cornell and other universities, rushed to issue statements attacking Israel.
Anti-Israel protesters on campus made statements and chanted slogans that went beyond being merely rude or unpleasant. Some seemed antisemitic. Others sounded like they were calling for a Jewish genocide.
How come those campus speech codes suddenly no longer applied? Having spent years policing what could be said to avoid ‘micro aggressions’, where were the university authorities when Jewish students faced actual aggression?
Giving evidence before a Congressional committee the other week, Claudine Gay of Harvard appeared to suggest that however unpalatable the protesters might be, it was all part of their right to freedom of speech. “Our university embraces a commitment to free expression” she said. Both she, and Liz Magill of Penn, failed to confirm that calls for genocide of Jews violated the university’s code of conduct.
Free speech appears to apply at these universities when you want to call for genocide, but not if you want to talk about genetics.
Watching both Gay and Magill give evidence, they both appeared out of their depth. I may not have been the only person left wondering how either of them was appointed to their respective roles in the first place. (Some have unkindly suggested it may have something to do with ‘woke’ hiring practices.)
The problems at US universities run deeper than just a handful of poor appointments.
Many US universities, including some right here in Mississippi, have DEI, or Diversity, Equity & Inclusion, programs. This needs to stop. Now.
DEI can sound entirely harmless. Who could possibly be against supporting different groups of individuals, including people of different races, ethnicities, religions, abilities, genders, and sexual orientations? Pretty soon, however, DEI proves to be something much more sinister.
In the name of diversity, some US universities have been systematically discriminating against some Americans on the basis of their race, limiting admissions to ‘overrepresented’ groups. In the name of equity, US universities have set out to address structural inequalities – historic and current – that advantage some and disadvantage others. In the name of inclusion, those with the wrong views are excluded.
DEI is flawed because it demands we think in terms of groups of individuals, rather than just individuals. Universities that apply DEI no longer treat everyone on campus equally, but on the basis of their immutable characteristics. DEI is a fundamentally un-American ideal.
DEI is also a formula almost guaranteed to produce institutional incompetence. Imagine, for a moment, that your favorite football or basketball team was to be run on the basis of DEI. If they recruited players on the basis of something other than their ability to play the game, they would lose. It makes no sense to run a public university that way.
What is to be done?
Last week, the Governor of Oklahoma, Kevin Stitt, showed the way. He issued an executive order banning DEI programs in public universities. Mississippi needs to do something similar.
An executive order in Mississippi could prohibit public universities from using state funds, property or resources for DEI initiatives.
To be sure, if the Governor was to do this in Mississippi there would be howls of protests. Various pundits would whine. It is what pundits do. Some will scream “supremacist!”. There is nothing supremacist about insisting every American is treated equally. Others will warn that unless we continue to pay DEI staff six figure salaries Mississippi will somehow regress.
I suspect most Mississippi parents wanting the best for their children would breathe a sigh of relief knowing that the sort of scenes we witnessed at some of those so-called ‘elite’ institutions never happen here.
If we want to stop the ‘woke’ takeover of our institutions, we need to act now.
Following Hamas’ terror attack on Israel, tens of thousands took to the streets. They marched in Manhattan and Chicago, as well as London and Paris. Rallies were held on the campuses of colleges across America.
Were the protesters lamenting the death of Israeli civilians? Not at all. Were they there to demand the release of young children taken hostage by Hamas? I missed that bit.
Instead, in the wake of a pogrom that saw the murder of 1,400 Jews, tens of thousands of Americans marched in support of their killers. The protesters literally chanted for the destruction of the state of Israel.
How can it possibly be that the great grandchildren of the generation of Americans that liberated Dachau could think this way?
For a generation, ‘woke’ ideas have been left to fester on college campuses. Over the past few weeks, we have started to see the real world consequences.
If we are to put this right, we first need to understand what has gone wrong. Looking at the protesters on social media, I was struck by the farcical contradictions.
Feminists were out there in support of an Islamist ideology that denies women rights. Self-styled democrats sided with those seeking to establish a theocracy. On social media, I saw a group calling themselves “Queers for Palestine”, holding aloft a rainbow motif. How long do you imagine they would survive in Gaza?
This confusion by the pro-Hamas protesters, which would be comical if it were not so grim, points to the root cause of the problem; for millions of young Americans, a creed of cultural relativism has been allowed to establish itself as a secular belief system.
If all cultures were of equal worth, then every culture would be as capable of producing science, innovation and political liberty – not to mention a US Constitution. Most cultures are not.
The trouble is that if you refuse to accept that some ways of life are better than others, you have no means of measuring what is good. In your twisted belief system, the head hackers of Hamas are no different from the Golani reservists prepared to take great personal risks to minimize civilian casualties.
Cultural relativism begins by applying double standards. It rapidly descends to favoring the non-Western over the Western.
Taught to believe in decolonizing the curriculum at school and university, perhaps you start to see Hamas terrorists as noble savages, battling to decolonize Palestine from the wicked West. Often unconsciously, we have raised an entire generation to see the human condition as Rousseau perceived it, rather than though the hard-headed realism of Hobbes. No wonder some then think like latter-day Jacobins. No surprise that the BBC, a once credible organization, refuses to call Hamas terrorists.
Ambivalence about the Western way of life slips into open animus.
“But what do you mean by Western way of life?” some will ask. “What do people living in the southern US or in Scandinavia possibly have in common with those in the Negev? There is no single Western culture”.
Culture is indeed complex, like the branches of a very tall tree. But within the tree of culture there is a definable trunk that one might call Judeo-Christian culture, from which extend a multiplicity of off shoots.
Culture, as with the branches of a tree, can sometimes be grafted, some cultures fused onto another. You even get what arborists call ‘inosculation’, when branches that had separated fuse back together as one again.
But as any arborist also knows, not every kind of graft will work. Not every kind of culture can be fused with every other. Some are incompatible. Nor can every way of life coexist alongside every other. Those Western feminists marching in support of Hamas seem not to have understood this. Their children and their grandchildren will.
Nor, perhaps, have Western progressives understood that Western culture, whether we are conscious of it or not, is a product of a distinctive set of ideas, both secular and ecclesiastical. I doubt many atheists would appreciate me pointing it out, but even their humanist belief system is a product of something uncontestably Judeo Christian. (Try living under Hamas as a secular humanist and see how long you last).
None of this really matters when everyone around us shares the same underlying Western cultural assumptions. To a degree that might surprise both evangelicals and atheists, they fundamentally do share a common set of assumptions. The trouble is that there is a growing body of those living in the West that don’t. There are an increasing number of people in the US, Britain and Europe – not to mention the Middle East - whose world view is shaped by the ideology of political Islamism, and Islamism’s principle proponent, Sayyid Qtub.
When political Islamism comes into conflict with Western ways, as it has with increasing frequency since the Salman Rushdie affair in the 1980s, the cultural relativists living in the West have no idea where to draw the line. Indeed, they do not even appreciate that there is a line to be drawn.
“But what about the sins of Western culture?” some will counter. “Weren’t Western countries once at the center of the slave trade? Didn’t women and minorities have to endure unequal treatment within living memory?”
Almost every contemporary non-Western culture around the world today falls short of the standards set by campus progressives. Only in the West are individual rights respected, often at times imperfectly (as the campus puritans are quick to point out). Anyone who does not know that may not know much about life outside America.
That the West today is a far more pleasant place for minorities than it was in the past is not evidence of Western guilt. It shows that cultural progress is possible. The way we used to live is not as good as it is today. Not every way of living is of equal worth. That cultural progress is possible is proof that cultural relativism is a nonsense, and that some ways of life are worth fighting in preference to others.
Here in the southern US, the Mississippi Center for Public Policy tries to teach a cohort of young Americans some of the underlying ideas and principles that underpin Western liberty. Through our Leadership Academy, we introduce them to the history of Western thought – Hobbes, Locke and the Founding Fathers. We discuss with them the morality of the free market, and American exceptionalism.
Students graduating from our program will, I hope, see the world very differently from the day they started. The insights and lessons we teach will, I hope, remain with them for life.
When we launched the Academy two years ago, I saw it was important, but no more than a nice-to-have. After the events of the past few weeks, I see it as perhaps the most important thing a think tank in America could be doing.
The scenes we saw from southern Israel were gruesome. Two hundred and fifty young people at a music festival murdered. Elderly people waiting at a bus stop gunned down. Women and children abducted at gun point, and carried off to a grislycaptivity at the hands of Hamas.
Hamas’ attack on Israel could not conceivably serve any conventional military purpose. The aim of the attack was to kill and abduct as many civilians as possible. Indeed, theIsraelis suspect that the ‘Tribe of Nova’ music festival, apparently advertised all over social media, was specifically targeted by Hamas.
How should the United States respond?
First, Americans should remember why they support Israel. A tiny slither of land less than a fifth the size of Louisiana, Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. In Israel, as in America, government comes from the people and by the people.
The only example of an open society in the Middle East, Israel is a social and economic success story. So much so, in fact, Israel’s very existence is a rebuke to the theocrats and thugocracies that surround her. This is why those theocrats and thugs seek her destruction.
It is easy to support Israel today when the images of the latest atrocities are fresh in our minds. But we need to brace ourselves to give Israel moral support in the bleak months ahead.
Even now, as Hamas paraded their helpless hostages in Gaza, there are no shortage of Western ‘intellectuals’ quick to come out in support of such savagery. Those anti-Israel voices will only grow louder as Israel undertakes the grim task ofneutralising further threats from Hamas in Gaza, and possibly even Hezbollah in the north.
One immediate consequence of Hamas’ attack has been to put Israel’s peace talks with Saudi Arabia on hold. Indeed, that might have been Iran’s intention in helping encourage and orchestrate the terror attacks, as some reports now suggest seems likely.
The atrocities in Israel should be a wakeup call for America’s foreign policy establishment. For two decades, Western countries have tried various initiatives to reach out to Iran. Doing so, we were told, would encourage ‘the moderates’ in Tehran. Handing over billions of dollars, according to many ‘experts’, would bring about a rapprochement.
Today, there is not much sign of any moderation by Iran. Nor have we seen a softening of Tehran’s position. What we have seen are a lot of dead young Israelis at a music festival, killed by Iranian-backed terrorists.
We must no longer pretend that we can deal with Iran as a normal nation.
For as long as I can remember, all the sensible foreign policy people in Washington and London talked about the need for a two state solution in the Middle East. Today we can see what Hamas are really like, and I wonder if there is anything sensible about giving such people sovereignty over anyone.
My greatest concern in the aftermath of these attacks in not with the Middle East, but with America.
As news of the atrocities was being reported, several mainstream broadcasters insisted on calling the perpetrators ‘militants’, rather than ‘terrorists’. In several cities in Europe and north America, we saw pro-Palestinian protesterschanting for the destruction of Israel.
At Harvard, 31 student groups, including the Muslim Student Association and Students for Health Equity and Justice in Palestine, issued a statement blaming Israel for what happened.
Maybe years of ‘woke’ teaching and recruitment at elite institutions comes with consequences?
After decades of promoting cultural relativism, the absurd idea that all cultures are of equal worth, we end up with an intellectual ‘elite’ unable to differentiate between an imperfect democracy, Israel, and a gang of savages, Hamas.
It is this that really ought to concern us. Would you be happy having people that think this way running the State Department in 30 years time?
Israel, like America, has the munitions and the manpower she needs to defend herself against those intent on undermining her way of life. For now. What we must fear instead is the moral disarmament of the West that has been happening one campus at a time.
Job hiring website, Indeed.com, has published data showing the Jackson metro area to be one of the best performing metro areas in America for new job postings.
According to Indeed’s job posting index, the Jackson metro area jobs postings are 54 percent higher now than they were in February 2020. Of all the metro areas in America, only Phoenix in Arizona and Spokane in Washington performed better than Mississippi’s state capital.
“Indeed’s data on jobs growth shows Jackson Mississippi is outperforming most other American cities when it comes to jobs posting growth since February 2020” explained Douglas Carswell of the Mississippi Center for Public Policy.
“The Jackson metro area has since that time outperformed cities such as Raleigh, North Carolina and even Dallas, Texas in terms of new jobs postings on Indeed”.
“Clearly this is only one set of data from one job hiring firm, but it is indicative of a broader trend we are now seeing in Mississippi”, Carswell continued. “This state is on the up”.
“Since Governor Tate Reeves signed into law a universal occupational licensing law, and with all that inward investment flowing into the state, the jobs market has picked up. Mississippi is now part of a wider southern economic success story”.
China is going to become the world’s number one economic superpower, we were told. And as China takes off economically, they said, she is going to become just like the rest of us.
This is what I call the China fallacy, and neither of the assumptions that underpin it are true.
China has indeed had three decades of double-digit growth. Her take off has been so spectacular, China went from being a largely agrarian economy that accounted for less than 2 percent of world output in 1980 to almost a fifth of output now.
But far from becoming more like us, China under President Xi seems to be becoming not just un-Western, but increasing anti-Western.
Twenty years ago, when China was admitted to the World Trade Organisation and President Clinton talked of China as a ‘strategic partner’, all the clever people in Washington said China would move our way.
By letting China join the international system, the experts said, China would become part of it. Think of all those tens of millions of middle class Chinese, they assured us. Soon, like the middle classes in America and Europe, they would be demanding all the trappings of liberal democracy.
Two decades later China is busy trying to subvert the international order. Chinese foreign policy seems to be all about creating rival structures and processes. Chinese government agents engage in the kind of espionage activities you might expect from a hostile foe.
Those that perpetuated the China fallacy used to tell us that following the British handover of Hong Kong, China would grow to become more like Hong Kong. Instead, the opposite has happened. Hong Kong has been brought into line with the rest of China, and what limited freedoms her people had have been taken away.
Far from taking her place at the international table, China behaves as if she wants to overturn it. China amasses troops in the western Pacific, bullying Taiwan and making little secret of her plan to invade the island. This would be the moral equivalent of the United States threatening to annex Vancouver Island.
Rather than becoming more Western, China’s government continually seeks new ways to restrict her citizens from accessing the internet. Digital technology has been harnessed to monitor the day to day activities of her own people. The autocrats that preside over China are so thin skinned and morally bankrupt, then actively clamp down on the Falun Gong movement. This would be the moral equivalent of the US government trying to shut down yoga classes.
The assumption that China, under the communist party, is ever going to emulate the West is wrong. Wrong, too, is the other side of the China fallacy – the assumption that China is destined to be a great superpower.
For as long as I can remember, highbrow magazines have been publishing articles forecasting that China’s economy will overtake America’s. At one time, we were told this would happen in the 2020s. Then it was the 2030s. Now I read it is supposed to happen before 2050.
I predict that China’s economy will never overtake America’s. Only last year, China ceased to be the most populous country on the planet, as India overtook her. China’s demographic future looks ominous.
Today there are 1.4 billion people in China. By the end of this century, some estimate that China’s population will have fallen about 40 percent to 800 million.
The next few years will see a significant fall in China’s economic growth, I suspect.
It is relatively easy to produce big gains in economic output when you move farm workers into factories (see Soviet Russia in the 1950s for details).
China was able to accelerate economically as a consequence of Deng Xiaoping’s reforms. Deng’s policies were not only market-friendly. Under Deng, decision-making was relatively decentralized. Maritime provinces had lots of autonomy. Beijing did not try to pre-empt every decision.
Under Xi, China has abandoned the Deng reforms, and reverted to what you might call the Ming tradition of top down control. It is not an encouraging precedent.
Far from being an economic dynamo, China is on course to becoming the next Japan. Like China, Japan was once supposed to overtake America. Instead, a previously thriving, export-driven economy has been reduced to stagnation by demographics and debt.
China may not become the world’s economic superpower, but this does not mean that China is not a threat. Quite the opposite.
Just over a century ago, a recently industrialized power, Germany, started to challenge the international order. Economically and militarily powerful, Germany nonetheless sensed that other powers were not so far behind. Among German’s leaders there was a sense that if Germany was serious about rearranging the furniture in Europe, she had a limited window of opportunity to do so. The consequences of that mindset were catastrophic.
My fear is that China under the communist party sees herself caught in a similar window of opportunity. Her demographic calamity, coupled with slow growth, mean that her relative power will only decline.
America is right to be strengthening her fleet in the Pacific (Three cheers to Mississippi Senator, Roger Wicker, for providing such leadership on this – America will be safer for it). It is also important that America works with an alliance of countries, including Australia and Japan to ensure the security of the Pacific.
China might not be the world’s number one economic power, but I suspect she will be the world’s biggest geopolitical headache for the foreseeable future.
"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."
Those words spoken by Rev. Martin Luther King provide one of the best-known quotes in America's history. His phrase is as famous as anything Thomas Jefferson or Abraham Lincoln ever said.
King’s words resonate as powerfully anything Jefferson or Lincoln said precisely because they, too, are an appeal to the same principles upon which America was founded; that all Americans are created equal.
Today, however, Martin Luther King’s vision of America, and the Founding principles on which the Republic has been built, are under attack.
Instead of teaching us to judge fellow Americans according to the content of their character, a radical ideology, Critical Race Theory, is teaching Americans to see everything in terms of race.
Critical Race theorists hold that the United States is founded on racial supremacy and oppression. They reformulate the old Marxist idea that society is divided between the oppressors and the oppressed, replacing the class categories of bourgeoisie and proletariat with the identity categories of white and black.
This makes Critical Race Theory a deeply divisive ideology and an extremist one that seeks to overthrow America's existing social and economic order.
At the Mississippi Center for Public Policy, we have been leading the fight against Critical Race Theory. First, we published a report full of evidence, detailing the extent to which this ideology is being taught in our public education system.
We also produced a model piece of legislation to tackle Critical Race Theory. Our proposal to tackle Critical Race Theory is not just consistent with Rev. King’s vision of America. I believe it would give us a legal framework to help ensure America lives up to his ideal. Our proposed law is also consistent with a belief in freedom and liberty.
I am delighted to report that a bill on Critical Race Theory passed through the State Senate by a clear majority recently. The bill is due to be assigned to a House committee shortly, and it is the only bill that addresses Critical Race Theory currently under consideration.
It is absolutely essential that we recognize that it is not enough to pass a law to defeat Critical Race Theory. We need to explain to the rising generation of Mississippians what it is about America that makes this country so special.
For most of human history, people were not treated as individuals in possession of inalienable rights. Hierarchy and hereditary were seen as the natural order. America, which was founded on the principle that all are created equal, was one of the first societies in the world where people began to be defined in terms of individual rights instead.
To be clear, the Founding principles were often very imperfectly applied. America produced laws and leaders that often failed to live up to the Founding principles. But that is not to say that the principles on which America was founded were themselves flawed. They are not.
The principles on which America was founded cannot be bettered. As Calvin Coolidge put it 150 years after the Declaration of Independence, “If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. No advance can be made beyond these [principles]."
Our "woke" elites today seek to return us to the pre-modern idea of group rights, collective identity, and advancement by caste.
As Coolidge went on to warn, if anyone rejects the principles on which America was founded, the only direction in which they will take America is backward, “Those that wish to proceed in that direction cannot claim progress.”
How odd that today, Critical Race theorists call themselves progressives. If they prevail, they will take us back to a pre-modern past.
It is vital that we ensure that the rising generation in our state understands and appreciates why Critical Race Theory is so wrong and appreciates what makes America so exceptional.
This is a fight that we can win.
The Mississippi Legislature is taking the fight to Critical Race Theory with legislation aiming to ensure that public institutions of learning shall direct or compel students to affirm that all are equal.
Senator Michael McLendon (R-D. 1) has drafted a bill based on the Mississippi Center for Public Policy’s recent policy paper, Combatting Critical Race Theory in Mississippi. The act shall provide that no publicly-funded educational institution will be able to compel students to think that any sex, race, ethnicity, religion, or any other factor that an individual can or may not be able to change about themselves makes them any less of a person, inferior, nor superior. The legislation is simply about affirming that all are equal.
No one should have an issue with such a bill. Yet, around the country, there are constant talking-points from those on the Left either saying that there is no need for such a bill because Critical Race Theory is not being taught and is a “right-wing conspiracy” or those on the Left saying, “Yes, it is being taught and should be, therefore there is no need for a bill to combat it!” The fact of the matter is that – as our paper pointed out – Critical Race Theory is being taught in Mississippi in some form or fashion, and it is up to us to combat this Marxist-like agenda.
The best way to combat Critical Race Theory is with a good idea replacing the bad one it is. As the bill reiterates, we are all equal. The famous line from the Declaration of Independence goes: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Did America always live by this principle? No, but this amazing country has come so far and made so much progress. Whether it be the Constitution and Bill of Rights, the Emancipation Proclamation, innovation, Women’s Suffrage, or the Civil Rights Movement, we have shown the world that America is the greatest opportunity for human flourishing. Mississippi is no different.
The Mississippi Center for Public Policy approves of this legislation and will continue to update you as the 2022 Mississippi Legislative Session continues, and you can keep up with measures by watching our Legislative Tracker.
Third-party education organizations have played an increasingly strong influence on the direction being taken by the Mississippi Department of Education. Despite the fact that many parents in the state are concerned about the direction of the education system toward Critical Race Theory, the Mississippi Department of Education (MDE) recently announced that it will be revising its social studies curriculum based on standards established by such questionable organizations.
Recent debates surrounding Critical Race Theory, American heritage, and government education have highlighted how third-party education organizations on the national level often have a large degree of undue influence on the education curriculum in Mississippi. The Mississippi Center for Public Policy has long sounded the alarm on such organizations, including in an extensive report on the influence of Critical Race Theory in Mississippi. The report uncovered that while MDE has not overtly taught CRT, there has been a prevalence of MDE promoting resources from organizations that openly embrace CRT. A recent article from Yall Politics further demonstrated that much of the proposed changes to the state social studies curriculum are directly based upon the recommendations of such organizations.
The key problem with MDE utilizing the resources of such third-party organizations is that they often have an agenda that is far removed from the priorities of Mississippi parents. There are several key examples of such organizations holding an undue sway on Mississippi education.
For instance, MCPP’s CRT report provides documentation of MDE promoting the Zinn Education Project as a third-party teaching resource provider. Among other things, Zinn's resources include activities that give a portrayal of Christopher Columbus as a murderer and resources on how to teach mathematics using social justice and intersectionality.
In addition, MDE has also implemented Social Emotional Learning (SEL) standards. While such concepts may seem benign at first glance, the standards include initiatives such as an “Equity Monitor” staffed with the task of ensuring school meetings are perceived through the lens of race and gender. Such standards are based upon the recommendations of the Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL). With numerous references to the racial undertones of many of its SEL standards, the CASEL organization includes resources such as a racial relations document that proclaims: “systemic racism is so deeply rooted in our history, culture and institutions that there’s no escaping it.”
Finally, MDE has fundamentally based its social studies curriculum on the standards established by several national organizations, including National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS). NCSS has several events and resources with CRT implications, such as “The Historical Roots of Structural Racism” and “Black History is Not American History: Toward a Framework of Black Historical Consciousness.” Such resources include statements such as “we should not debate whether systemic racism exists, but provide opportunities for students, precluding racist commentary, to analyze the data evidence and establish this conclusion on their own.” Thus, rather than fostering a culture of academic analysis and dialogue, the NCSS has made its intentions to present a singular perspective quite clear. In light of such statements from the organization, it is unclear why the MDE is collaborating with it to establish social studies standards.
The national education establishment has a long track record of placing leftist agendas at the forefront of its priorities. Rather than importing such agendas into the Mississippi education system, there should be a proactive effort to consciously reject ideologies that place an undue emphasis on students’ immutable characteristics. Instead of a bureaucratic and top-down approach, Mississippi’s government education system needs more accountability so that it is informed by the citizenry and not the education establishment of the Left.
1970’s Santa Clause is Comin to Town is one of Rankin/Bass’ most popular stop-motion animated programs. The holiday classic, based on the song of the same name, tells the story of how Santa Clause came to be. To lovers of liberty, it also serves as an allegory for free markets and how prohibition and tyrannical laws only lead to worse outcomes.
Santa Clause is Comin’ to Town casts its title character as an idealist, an individualist who detests nonsensical regulatory laws and fights against them, all whilst spreading Christmas cheer. The tyranny begins when Sombertown’s governor, the Burgermeister Meisterburger seeks to ban all toys after he trips over one and breaks his leg.
Does this not seem familiar to when we hear left-wing activists nowadays seeking to ban anything they deem “dangerous?” – guns, toy guns (ironically), fast food advertisements, fossil fuel-powered cars, pets, “violent” video games (more toys), and free speech, among other seemingly harmless things. The thing is, we continue to attempt to ban things when we know that doesn’t work. By nature, people will do what authority tells them not to. Outlawing something that we do not understand, fear, or do not like does not work and is simply unjust. To decide what’s good and not good for an individual without their consent is an infringement on self-governance completely. The most prevalent example of this is the prohibition of alcohol, which we know only made matters worse – crime, addiction, corruption, etc.
Santa sees the injustice happening in Sombertown and dares to defy the governor’s orders. When he finally makes the perilous journey into the village, he opens his sack of toys, and happy children commence to playing with them.
Infuriated, Meisterburger orders the arrest of the children, but Santa intervenes and offers him a yo-yo. It immediately improves the governor’s sour disposition, until one of his officers reminds him that he's breaking his own law. Thankfully though, the distraction allows Santa to escape arrest.
Santa later launches a guerrilla campaign to smuggle toys into Sombertown. He adopts the conventions that we now associate with the Legend of St. Nick — arriving under cover, entering homes through unconventional means, planting toys in wet socks hung by the fire — to meet the demand for toys while avoiding law enforcement.
The governor’s men then adopt more aggressive tactics like unreasonable searches and seizures, as well as subjecting violators to excessive punishments, though we’re told the tyrant(s) eventually died off and were replaced by better men. “By and by,” the narrator says, “the good people realized how silly their laws were,” and Santa's story goes worldwide. He no longer is considered an outlaw, but a saint. He grows older, but continues an annual ride across the planet, delivering gifts to all the well-behaved boys and girls.
It's an unconventional happy ending, and a silly allegory, but one that resonates with those who favor limited government. Unjust laws are finally repealed with the help of a brave individualist and freedom reigns. If there is some lesson to be learned, it’s that the prohibition of anything could result in many worse outcomes – crime, corruption, and increased government control over average citizens’ lives. If the adults don’t get anything out of this animated classic, hopefully, the kids will.