.jpg)
This could have been the finest president of the United States ever.
http://www.examiner.com/x-12813-LDS-Church-Examiner~y2009m7d10-Liberal-or-conservative-Joseph-Smiths-1844-presidential-platform
Following the Missouri period, during which Joseph was falsely imprisoned for several months without trial and the saints were driven from the state by mob violence, the enemies of the Church constantly harassed the Prophet by legal writ and threats of kidnapping. After several years in Nauvoo, those same enemies found likeminded souls in Illinois, bringing persecution and calumny upon the Prophet and the Church.
Many Saints regard the Democrat party with disdain for its liberal social policies, blaming them for social decay, expansion of the welfare dole, and support of gay rights, feminism, and radical environmentalism that has locked up millions of acres in the West. Would Joseph be a Republican if he lived today? A study of his views offers a surprising view.
Joseph, as the mayor of Nauvoo and author of the city's charter revealed an instinctive knowledge of justice and civil responsibility. Joseph was a firm believer in the Constitution and in particular the Bill of Rights. He had been told by God that the document was created by men who were raised up for that very purpose.
Joseph nevertheless believed that a strong central government was critical to the future of the United States. That position would have more closely aligned him with Federalists of his day, but is probably more representative of the actions of Democratic President Lyndon Johnson in our time, who called out the National Guard to enforce racial desegregation in the South.
Joseph felt that the Congress should amend the Constitution to give the President authority to send and army if necessary to quell violence or repel invasion of a state. Article IV of the Constitution states that the federal government shall protect the states against "domestic violence" only on application of the state legislature of governor. Joseph's position originated with the experience in Missouri where the governor, Lilburn L. Boggs, who was an anti-Mormon sympathizer and used his authority to issue an extermination order against the Mormons in 1838.
Joseph felt so strongly about the duty of the government to protect citizens' rights, that he even advocated capital punishment for those officials who neglected to do so. He said, "The Constitution should contain a provision that every officer of the government who should neglect or refuse to extend the protection guaranteed in the Constitution should be subject to capital punishment; and then the president of the United States would not say, “Your cause is just, but I can do nothing for you' [or] a governor issue exterminating orders."
In the 1990s, Al Gore's programs to reinvent government did little to reduce the tax burden it places on Americans. Republicans advocate less government, but when they were given a majority in Congress, they failed to reduce the bloating bureaucracy. The years of George W. Bush's administration did little to curb government growth or limit its power. Former presidential candidate Ross Perot proposed getting the lobbyists out of Washington. What more effective way to limit government than to reduce the number of legislators? Fewer of them would force greater efficiency, limit the amount of pork they could stuff in the budget, and reduce the drag of government regulation on the private sector. Lawmakers are there to make laws. If you want to reduce the amount of intrusive government regulation, reduce the number of lawmakers.
Joseph also proposed a pay cut for legislators, from $8 to $2 a day. He said, "That is more than a farmer gets, and he lives honestly." I believe the framers of the Constitution had in mind that citizens would serve in government as a civic duty, similar to the obligation of military service. Joseph's view on public service was that it was an extension of King Benjamin's teachings in the Book of Mormon, that when we serve our fellow man, we serve God. At other times, Joseph expressed the sentiment that lawyers should be sent out to preach the Gospel and serve the poor and downtrodden before practicing their craft so they might be instilled with a spirit of compassion.
Prison Reform
Joseph's views regarding crime and punishment were liberal, even for our day. Joseph had a clear understanding of the principles of justice and mercy. Today, modern conservatives have taken a "get tough" attitude on crime. Mandatory sentencing, "three strikes" laws, and juveniles being prosecuted as adults have been some of the responses to criminality. He proposed, "Let penitentiaries be turned into seminaries of learning.” His statement, "Rigor and seclusion never do as much to reform the propensities of men as [would] reason and friendship" demonstrate that he had a firm belief in the ability of the sinner to repent and mend his ways.”
Military Reform
In modern terms, the pardons issued by President Carter to Vietnam-era draft dodgers are reflective of this spirit. Although many expected it to undermine "good order and discipline" in the ranks, our all-volunteer military has proven to be the most highly skilled and motivated in the world. Again, Joseph Smith's views lean more towards modern liberalism.
Economy/National Bank
Today's conservatives, particularly those who are critical of the Federal Reserve System, find themselves at odds with Joseph Smith's stand on the value of a national bank. Prior to the civil war, many felt that a central bank would lead to the loss of state sovereignty. The Prophet's views were more in tune with the Federalists of his day.
Although critics point out that we don't have a national bank, the truth is that we have outsourced that function to the Fed. Obviously, the wisdom of that policy is certainly debatable, but the principle that won out in its selection was the establishment of a national bank. The challenge before us now is to make the Federal Reserve accountable to the people and their representatives.
Banking in the US during the early to mid-1800s was barely regulated. Private banks were common and required only a charter from the state in which it resided. Depositors had essentially no security or guarantees on their money. In Kirtland, Ohio, Joseph and a number of prominent men founded the Kirtland Safety Society, a private bank that they hoped would provide stability during a growth boom in the city.
The arrival of thousands of new Saints had caused the demand and price of property to skyrocket. Inflation and speculation were a problem throughout the country, but the conditions in Kirtland became critical when the state, under pressure from anti-Mormon community members (primarily pastors of Methodist and Campbellite churches) exercised their influence.
Although it was legal for the Kirtland Safety Society to operate without a charter, the lack thereof was a detriment to its long-term success. Nationwide, bank failures hurt many communities and Kirtland was a victim of the Safety Society's failure. Of this experience, Joseph Smith's views on the stability of a strong central bank were strongly founded. He proposed the founding of a central bank with branches in the states and territories and listed details about the election of officers, limitations on floating currency, and disposition of profits as national revenue.
Current criticism of public works projects most often comes from conservative politicians who feel that the private sector should bear the burden of most services. While Joseph believed firmly in limited government, he was an advocate of using the powers of office to facilitate community growth and advancement.
Foreign Affairs/Immigration
Assessment
The Prophet Joseph Smith's views were a unique combination of liberalism and conservatism. There is no political party today that completely embodies this unique mixture. Many of his critics have derided his candidacy of being merely the egotistical ambitions of a man who sought to impose his religion on other by virtue of the state’s power. We must realize that Joseph had foreknowledge of his impending assassination and that the political parties of his day were trying to divide the body of the Church. With that in mind, it becomes clear then that Joseph sought to simply take the votes of the saints “off the table” by submitting his name as a candidate for the presidency. He knew beforehand that he would have to leave them behind and that wolves would circle the flock. If they were not one in spirit an purpose, the Church might not survive.
Thus Joseph’s candidacy was, as historian B.H. Roberts speculated, an attempt to take the weapon of disunity out of the Adversary’s hand, so the Church could withstand his loss and the transition to the Quorum of the Twelve’s governance. As in our day, the politicos of his time sought to divide, marginalize, and to weaken the loyalties of the saints to one another, all the while posing an inherent threat to their peace and safety. When you consider the parties contending for secular power in our world today, it would be well if we would consider Joseph’s counsel on the matter whenever we go to the polls. Let me conclude with his own words on the subject.
Where can one find a party today of social conservatives who are economically liberal? Where do we find those who envision the federal role in guaranteeing civil rights, yet respect the Constitution's separation of powers and limitations on federal power? Which party offers a proper balance between enlightened tolerance and moral license? As members of the Church, the choice is often this: Do we vote with a sectarian Christian "Taliban" that regards us as non-Christian cultists, who would (were it not for the influence of liberalism in our society) gladly burn our homes and our churches? Or do we side with tolerant liberals who support policies that undermine the sanctity of the family, seek to rewrite the definition of marriage, and seek to perpetuate Margaret Sanger's horrid views of using abortion to limit the populations of undesirables? Since the passing of Proposition 8 last September, even the Left has it in for us now.
In future political contests, let us choose worthy individuals instead of voting for the lesser evils placed before us. If we feel as though we are throwing our votes away, then know that a prophet of God has told us that it is the more noble course of action.
Background
Most Latter-day Saints are aware of the fact that the Prophet Joseph Smith declared his candidacy for the presidency in the election of 1844. To an outside observer, one unfamiliar with our history, Joseph's candidacy would not be considered a serious attempt or perhaps was just a self-indulgence ego trip to elevate him to national prominence.
Following the Missouri period, during which Joseph was falsely imprisoned for several months without trial and the saints were driven from the state by mob violence, the enemies of the Church constantly harassed the Prophet by legal writ and threats of kidnapping. After several years in Nauvoo, those same enemies found likeminded souls in Illinois, bringing persecution and calumny upon the Prophet and the Church.
As he campaigned as General Joseph Smith (he was a Lieutenant General of the Nauvoo Legion by state and federal appointment), Joseph's main plank was the power of the executive to quell violence and preserve civil order in the states when the states failed to do so. This arose from his experience with President Martin Van Buren, to whom he pleaded for redress on behalf of the Saints. Van Buren's callous response was, "Your cause is just, but I can do nothing for you" for fear of losing the vote of the state of Missouri.
I regarded this issue as being unique in the context of his experience and surroundings. Nothing quite similar exists today. However, my curiosity was to see where the Prophet would stand on issues of a contemporary nature. Digging deeper into his views, I wondered, "Would Joseph be a Democrat, a Republican, or a Libertarian if he lived today?" Does any party today resemble his views?
A generation ago, more Latter-day Saints in the United States considered themselves Democrats than Republicans. Today, the reverse is probably true because of the perception that Republican positions on the Constitution, law and order, gun control, labor unions, abortion, education, and moral issues are considered more true to the original intent of the founders..
Many Saints regard the Democrat party with disdain for its liberal social policies, blaming them for social decay, expansion of the welfare dole, and support of gay rights, feminism, and radical environmentalism that has locked up millions of acres in the West. Would Joseph be a Republican if he lived today? A study of his views offers a surprising view.
Law and Order
Joseph, as the mayor of Nauvoo and author of the city's charter revealed an instinctive knowledge of justice and civil responsibility. Joseph was a firm believer in the Constitution and in particular the Bill of Rights. He had been told by God that the document was created by men who were raised up for that very purpose.
Joseph nevertheless believed that a strong central government was critical to the future of the United States. That position would have more closely aligned him with Federalists of his day, but is probably more representative of the actions of Democratic President Lyndon Johnson in our time, who called out the National Guard to enforce racial desegregation in the South.
Joseph felt that the Congress should amend the Constitution to give the President authority to send and army if necessary to quell violence or repel invasion of a state. Article IV of the Constitution states that the federal government shall protect the states against "domestic violence" only on application of the state legislature of governor. Joseph's position originated with the experience in Missouri where the governor, Lilburn L. Boggs, who was an anti-Mormon sympathizer and used his authority to issue an extermination order against the Mormons in 1838.
Joseph felt so strongly about the duty of the government to protect citizens' rights, that he even advocated capital punishment for those officials who neglected to do so. He said, "The Constitution should contain a provision that every officer of the government who should neglect or refuse to extend the protection guaranteed in the Constitution should be subject to capital punishment; and then the president of the United States would not say, “Your cause is just, but I can do nothing for you' [or] a governor issue exterminating orders."
Race Issues/Slavery
Joseph opposed slavery, but his approach to its abolition was unique. His plan to free the slaves involved giving Congress a pay cut, reducing the number of member in the state delegations in the House, and opening the sale of public lands in the West. The revenues gained from these actions were to be used to purchase the slaves' freedom in a phased process through 1850.
In remarks outside his prepared campaign views, Joseph made it known that he advocated educating slaves and fostering literacy, which was illegal in many states. Having taught that "the glory of God is intelligence" and that a man is saved "no faster than he gains intelligence," Joseph's broad views were a result of his understanding of the universality of God's love and the infinite nature of the Atonement. Joseph's solution to the slavery issue would have spared the United States the costly bloodshed of the Civil War and spared the country the debate over "reparations" which has recently come to the forefront again. His compassionate, reasonable plan might have gone a long way towards healing the wounds of racism that still fester today.
Congressional Reform
Joseph Smith proposed, as previously mentioned, reducing the number of state representatives in the House significantly. In 1844, the Union consisted of 26 states, with 52 senators and 223 representatives for a population of about 20 million. Joseph's proposal of having two representatives for every one million people would have reduced the number of representatives in the House to 40.
In the 1990s, Al Gore's programs to reinvent government did little to reduce the tax burden it places on Americans. Republicans advocate less government, but when they were given a majority in Congress, they failed to reduce the bloating bureaucracy. The years of George W. Bush's administration did little to curb government growth or limit its power. Former presidential candidate Ross Perot proposed getting the lobbyists out of Washington. What more effective way to limit government than to reduce the number of legislators? Fewer of them would force greater efficiency, limit the amount of pork they could stuff in the budget, and reduce the drag of government regulation on the private sector. Lawmakers are there to make laws. If you want to reduce the amount of intrusive government regulation, reduce the number of lawmakers.
Joseph also proposed a pay cut for legislators, from $8 to $2 a day. He said, "That is more than a farmer gets, and he lives honestly." I believe the framers of the Constitution had in mind that citizens would serve in government as a civic duty, similar to the obligation of military service. Joseph's view on public service was that it was an extension of King Benjamin's teachings in the Book of Mormon, that when we serve our fellow man, we serve God. At other times, Joseph expressed the sentiment that lawyers should be sent out to preach the Gospel and serve the poor and downtrodden before practicing their craft so they might be instilled with a spirit of compassion.
Prison Reform
Joseph's views regarding crime and punishment were liberal, even for our day. Joseph had a clear understanding of the principles of justice and mercy. Today, modern conservatives have taken a "get tough" attitude on crime. Mandatory sentencing, "three strikes" laws, and juveniles being prosecuted as adults have been some of the responses to criminality. He proposed, "Let penitentiaries be turned into seminaries of learning.” His statement, "Rigor and seclusion never do as much to reform the propensities of men as [would] reason and friendship" demonstrate that he had a firm belief in the ability of the sinner to repent and mend his ways.”
He did not advocate leniency. Criminals were to be put to work on public works where they could learn useful trades and receive education. Nevertheless, Joseph believed that the death penalty was a legitimate deterrent to heinous crimes, including the punishment of government officials who failed to justly exercise their authority to protect citizens from violence. (Imagine applying that leverage to judges today who sentence violent child molesters to three months probation!) Joseph also sought to end the practice of imprisoning a person for indebtedness, a practice that was still common in many states.
Military Reform
Joseph Smith proposed the abolition of court-martial for those who deserted the military. He sought to elevate the principle of honor and to render good for evil. His own faith and experience taught him that people respond more willingly when high expectations are ennobled and that force and compulsion served only the Adversary's purposes. Joseph wrote, "Be sure that good is rendered for evil in all cases: and the whole nation…will rise up with righteousness: and be respected as wise and worthy on earth."
In modern terms, the pardons issued by President Carter to Vietnam-era draft dodgers are reflective of this spirit. Although many expected it to undermine "good order and discipline" in the ranks, our all-volunteer military has proven to be the most highly skilled and motivated in the world. Again, Joseph Smith's views lean more towards modern liberalism.
Economy/National Bank
Today's conservatives, particularly those who are critical of the Federal Reserve System, find themselves at odds with Joseph Smith's stand on the value of a national bank. Prior to the civil war, many felt that a central bank would lead to the loss of state sovereignty. The Prophet's views were more in tune with the Federalists of his day.
Although critics point out that we don't have a national bank, the truth is that we have outsourced that function to the Fed. Obviously, the wisdom of that policy is certainly debatable, but the principle that won out in its selection was the establishment of a national bank. The challenge before us now is to make the Federal Reserve accountable to the people and their representatives.
Banking in the US during the early to mid-1800s was barely regulated. Private banks were common and required only a charter from the state in which it resided. Depositors had essentially no security or guarantees on their money. In Kirtland, Ohio, Joseph and a number of prominent men founded the Kirtland Safety Society, a private bank that they hoped would provide stability during a growth boom in the city.
The arrival of thousands of new Saints had caused the demand and price of property to skyrocket. Inflation and speculation were a problem throughout the country, but the conditions in Kirtland became critical when the state, under pressure from anti-Mormon community members (primarily pastors of Methodist and Campbellite churches) exercised their influence.
Although it was legal for the Kirtland Safety Society to operate without a charter, the lack thereof was a detriment to its long-term success. Nationwide, bank failures hurt many communities and Kirtland was a victim of the Safety Society's failure. Of this experience, Joseph Smith's views on the stability of a strong central bank were strongly founded. He proposed the founding of a central bank with branches in the states and territories and listed details about the election of officers, limitations on floating currency, and disposition of profits as national revenue.
Pork and Public Works
Current criticism of public works projects most often comes from conservative politicians who feel that the private sector should bear the burden of most services. While Joseph believed firmly in limited government, he was an advocate of using the powers of office to facilitate community growth and advancement.
When the Saints first arrived in Nauvoo, they were forced to make-do for a time without the Prophet, who was being held without charges in a Missouri jail. During the Prophet's forced absence, the community suffered terrible trials of poverty, sickness, and disease. Many of them had been forced to leave Missouri with no more than the clothing on their backs.
When Joseph arrived several months later, he wept at the sight of them, and even fell ill himself. After a miraculous recovery, he healed hundreds in the name of Jesus, and then set forth to turn the place into a healthy home. Armed with his vision of Nauvoo the Beautiful, one of his first projects was the temple.
The temple seems like an odd thing to start, when so many other needs pressed for the Saint's attention. Joseph's personal power was his ability to elevate the community's concerns from survival to godly sacrifice. The temple became a public works project on a huge scale. Stone quarries were opened, craftsmen came forward, shops and businesses arose to take care of the needs of the workers.
Joseph wrote the city's charter and became its first mayor. He felt no conflict between church and state, yet he respected the rights of all to believe or not. The city prospered and flourished in the space of it's few years before the saints were forced to abandon it. Joseph knew, perhaps in the same way John F. Kennedy knew, that if you give citizens a clear vision of where you want to go and let the government facilitate the process, remarkable things can happen.
Foreign Affairs/Immigration
The Wentworth Letter of 1843, from which the Articles of Faith were derived, demonstrates that his views on citizenship were broad. Knowing that the Church he founded would go to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people, he was careful to recognize the validity of various forms of government. As a result, Mormonism has been able to thrive in democracies, monarchies, and even in socialist countries. He nevertheless was an advocate of the superiority of the Constitution, a champion of God-given rights, and a voice against oppression.
Although he did not travel widely, Joseph was well read and had a grasp of many international issues. Relating to the election of 1844, he proposed the immediate annexation of the Oregon Territory and hoped to expand the union in consultation with Native Americans, being conscious of their rights and claims. However, these sentiments changed when it came to Texas, feeling that Texas should be admitted to the union only if it petitioned to do so.
He extended invitation to Mexico and Canada to join the Union as well, feeling that any people who wished to come under the protection of the U.S. Constitution should be encouraged to do so. He did not advocate the taking of territory by force or conflict. Had his policies been implemented, the history of the west, our relations with aboriginal peoples, and the current problems of illegal immigration might be significantly improved.
Assessment
The Prophet Joseph Smith's views were a unique combination of liberalism and conservatism. There is no political party today that completely embodies this unique mixture. Many of his critics have derided his candidacy of being merely the egotistical ambitions of a man who sought to impose his religion on other by virtue of the state’s power. We must realize that Joseph had foreknowledge of his impending assassination and that the political parties of his day were trying to divide the body of the Church. With that in mind, it becomes clear then that Joseph sought to simply take the votes of the saints “off the table” by submitting his name as a candidate for the presidency. He knew beforehand that he would have to leave them behind and that wolves would circle the flock. If they were not one in spirit an purpose, the Church might not survive.
Thus Joseph’s candidacy was, as historian B.H. Roberts speculated, an attempt to take the weapon of disunity out of the Adversary’s hand, so the Church could withstand his loss and the transition to the Quorum of the Twelve’s governance. As in our day, the politicos of his time sought to divide, marginalize, and to weaken the loyalties of the saints to one another, all the while posing an inherent threat to their peace and safety. When you consider the parties contending for secular power in our world today, it would be well if we would consider Joseph’s counsel on the matter whenever we go to the polls. Let me conclude with his own words on the subject.
“And if we have to throw away our votes, we had better do so upon a worthy rather than upon an unworthy individual, who might make use of the weapon we put in his hand to destroy us with."
Where can one find a party today of social conservatives who are economically liberal? Where do we find those who envision the federal role in guaranteeing civil rights, yet respect the Constitution's separation of powers and limitations on federal power? Which party offers a proper balance between enlightened tolerance and moral license? As members of the Church, the choice is often this: Do we vote with a sectarian Christian "Taliban" that regards us as non-Christian cultists, who would (were it not for the influence of liberalism in our society) gladly burn our homes and our churches? Or do we side with tolerant liberals who support policies that undermine the sanctity of the family, seek to rewrite the definition of marriage, and seek to perpetuate Margaret Sanger's horrid views of using abortion to limit the populations of undesirables? Since the passing of Proposition 8 last September, even the Left has it in for us now.
In future political contests, let us choose worthy individuals instead of voting for the lesser evils placed before us. If we feel as though we are throwing our votes away, then know that a prophet of God has told us that it is the more noble course of action.
