top of page
  • Nancy Churchill

Global vs Local Control

By Guest Columnist Nancy Churchill

When we pause to look at world events as a whole, we can observe a worldwide battle of ideas about the best form of governance. Those who study world history would point out this battle has been raging for millennia, maybe even since the dawn of civilization. Those who study the Bible find echoes of ancient battles in today’s current events. At the heart of this ancient and mighty battle is the idea of global vs. local control.

The ultimate in local control is the free will given to each person by God. Free will is not given by any earthly power or government; it is innate. We are born with the right to choose freely. Even animals have free will. The old saying “You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink,” illustrates this ancient understanding. Free will is an innate part of being alive.

However, in order for us to function as a civilized society, we recognize the need for rules, law and justice. In the family and in the community there are laws we expect everyone to obey in order to maintain safety and harmony. Without laws there is chaos; with laws there is order.

I believe our society, and all of humanity, agrees we need some form of governance. The question becomes, what form of governance is most just for the most people?

Our founders studied the various forms of government from monarchy to anarchy. They rejected those extremes, and paid particular attention to Plato’s Republic. Republic describes a single layer of government, with a ruling class of experts at the top, and the citizens below. In essence, the citizens of the republic are the serf class to the ruling class of experts.

Thomas Jefferson and other authors of the Constitution rejected Plato’s form of republic as too close to the tyranny of a monarch. They experimented with three branches of government—Executive branch, Judicial branch and Legislative branch—with the citizens electing the members of those branches.

Next, the founders recognized the need for these three subdivisions at three levels: federal, state and local. They believed government works best when local control is paramount. It’s best for the people to solve their own local problems, rather than have a solution imposed from outside of the community. Some scholars refer to this type of republic as a “layer cake” system.

Globalism in all of its forms—communism, socialism and dictatorship—regresses to tyrannical, top-down government. The ruling class, or central committee, is a small group of “experts” who view the locals as too uneducated and too stupid for self rule. They impose solutions from above, rather than allowing solutions to come from the local area. The laws only apply to the lower class, not to the ruling class. The end result of globalism, as we have seen many times in the last hundred years, is always tyranny and mass death.

Globalism and its supporting ideas of communism, socialism and dictatorship are bad ideas designed to collect power and wealth into the hands of a ruling class at the expense of the lower classes. By design, globalism is a deadly idea.

The current worldwide struggle is very simple: Global vs. Local. Patriots and freedom lovers worldwide are beginning to peacefully stand up and speak up for local control and free will. I cannot urge you strongly enough: get involved in your local government boards and committees and work to retain local control over your future.

Nancy Churchill is the state committeewoman for the Ferry County Republican Party. She may be reached at The opinions expressed in Dangerous Rhetoric are her own.


Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page