Days of Future Past

          We just got back from visiting our first grandchild. Grandchildren are the reward for not strangling our kids. I have been watching town halls and have several blogs rumbling about in my fevered brain.

          Would the Founding Fathers be Democrats or Republicans? Although claimed by both political Parties (like Jesus), the sentiments of the Founding Fathers were very different from modern political perspectives. This blog brings out such differences in order to inform a national path forward.

          The Founders recognized that political philosophies are tradeoffs. We note these tradeoffs daily in our need for security vs. liberty, State vs. Federal power, and the role of Government in our lives. However, issues tend to be framed in an adversarial dialectic, rather than acknowledging the validity inherent in opposing views. For example, one Party might be framed in terms of a European Socialist model and the opposition as laissez-faire. However, all Americans have need of and benefit from collective resources and services. Our nation was established to benefit the common welfare. So the reality is that collective need & responsibility (i.e. Government services...i.e. socialism) are a tradeoff rather than an either-or proposition. Past "socialists" established a five day, forty hour workweek, paid vacations, pensions & benefits for workers, and a social safety net that supports the needy, handicapped and elderly...and Congress. If you like any of these things, you just might be a socialist. It is historically interesting to note that the concept of European Socialism (political, not economic) originated in the United States. Unlike ourselves, our Founders were mindful of the tradeoffs and common ground of their positions.

          Our concepts of conservatism and liberalism would have been alien to their thinking. Liberals frame Government as a nanny, watchdog and parent. Conservatives see our nation as an "exceptional" global cop. The Founders actively avoided foreign entanglements and empire-building. It was America's job to build America.

          In the 18th Century, taking care of the needy, the destitute and the imprisoned were the responsibility of the community and the church, not the State. We worked as a community to improve our community. When civil and religious society abandoned their responsibility for social improvement, the need remained. In the vacuum, all that was left was Government.

        

          Take the concept of conservatism. Today we have three major dimensions to conservatism: fiscal, international, and social. The Founders only had the first two. As mentioned, the Founders were cautious concerning foreign entanglements. They also attempted to be responsible in their spending and taxation, although we have never in our history had a balanced budget or spent less than our revenue.

          The most notable difference with the Founders is their agreement on the issues we pack into our social dimensions. There was broad consensus on the civic responsibility of the individual and community. The shared value of liberty enabled a spectrum of religious, moral, and political views to contribute to civic life. Their core values enabled them to work together. How much does our fixation and contention on social issues divide our nation today? Should we challenge our current destructive ideologies if they don't help us work together?  

          Would Washington be a Democrat or Republican? Hard to say. Washington was cautious concerning Government spending, but he saw the necessity of covering such spending with taxation. It seems being reasonable separates the Founders from ourselves.

         

          Ideologically, Hamilton fought for a strong central Government and Jefferson advocated strong States rights and limited Federal influence. Hamilton got shot and Jefferson became President. When the opportunity presented itself, Jefferson promptly doubled the size of the United States, increased the influence of the Federal Government and created the first large deficit in our history. So much for ideology. Being realistic might differentiate these guys from ourselves. Ideologues live in the world that should be. The Founders were adapting and creating a new world.

Shared Values

          It would be very difficult for us to relate to an 18th Century worldview. We often view past civilizations though a contemporary lens. Rome appears to be one big toga party. But the Roman values of slavery, imperialism, militarism, and blood sports as popular entertainment would doubtlessly be discordant and offensive to modern sensibilities. However, Roman and Greek governance formed the intellectual framework for the foundation of the United States. The Founding Fathers translated archaic ancient practices into Enlightenment values and created our Constitutional Republic.

          This translation process is relevant for a few reasons. The Founding Fathers didn't treat ancient practices as sacred and set in stone. They were committed to creating a "more perfect union", which involved immediate amending of Constitutional governance. Today, some would hold the work of the Founding Fathers to be sacred and "literally" parse Constitutional law as fine as a religious scholar. Scripture distinguishes the spirit from the letter of the law. So should we when dealing with the Constitution and our Founding Fathers.

          We might do well to take from our national Founders their methodology, their core assumptions, their core values, and their motives. These are different than our own. They translated the past and responded to the unique challenges of their times. They were nation builders and they called on us as their legacy to be nation builders. We might compare our values, assumptions and practices with theirs in order to forge a path forward as a nation.

          In order to create our Union, the Founding Fathers had to work based on a consensus of values, assumptions, and beliefs. In order to renew our nation, we as a People must establish consensus on core values and assumptions. What were some of the values, assumptions, and practices of our forefathers?

Rules and Risk

          In a letter written from his Selma jail cell, Martin Luther King pointed out that everything the Founding Fathers did was illegal. Although informed by the past, our Founders were future thinkers, innovating a new society. These men were revolutionaries, risking their lives, vision, and progeny in order to organize and assemble. The seven signed Revolutionary documents were death sentences for the signatories if their cause failed. Numerous missions undertaken by Washington and his army were rolls of the die which might in a moment spell the total destruction of our national fighting capability and the failure of our revolutionary cause. These were men of passion who risked all. These were men creating rules as they went along, guided by shared core values of liberty, freedom and unity. Rather than work "within the system", our founders created a new system. They innovated a new course rather than comply with the conventional. Are we complying within a dysfunctional two Party political system? Are we entrenched in destructive ideologies and obsolete mindsets? Are we a compliant, conforming People mired in the past or a bold, innovative People forging a bright future together? Will we need to adopt the Founder's passion, values and bold action to re-create or renew our government and body politic?

Unity

          It is currently fashionable to identify identity in terms of diversity, how we are different. The dysfunctional poison within our Government arises from defining in terms of difference. Political identity, like religion, has a light tradition and a dark tradition, and there are constructive and destructive energies associated with both. The individual can tap into such constructive or destructive energies. Identification with a particular political reality and energy is a personal choice and decision. Diversity can build or destroy us as a nation.

          We can define ourselves relative to how we are different, or we can choose to define ourselves by how we are the same. We can search out or assume division or search out common ground. That is a choice and a decision.

          Identity is based on values and assumptions. Psychologically, internalized assumptions (part of who we are) are felt rather than considered. This means that if your value "boundary" is crossed, you will have a profound emotional reaction. Modern political realities are crafted based on deep emotional triggers to produce affiliation and divisions. In this way, the American People are being divided and conquered by the "system".

          One of the biggest changes in politics over the last 30 years is the framing of political opposition as "the enemy" rather than a differing political philosophy. The Founding Fathers would be profoundly opposed to framing fellow Americans and lawmakers as one might frame the forces of King George.

          Modern ideologies make those holding divergent views the enemy by polarizing into simplistic values and assumptions, such as red or blue, conservative or liberal, Christian or anybody else, pro-life or choice, gays or "traditional", "big government" spending or the illusion of not-big government spending. Such political ideologies promote a visceral kneejerk reaction as they leverage hate, fear, arrogance and other primordial emotions. These emotions are distilled into polarized purist factions and monitored by thought police. You can't compromise or give an inch. They're the ENEMY for God sake.

          The Founding Fathers also had profound economic and political disagreements but all still sought unity. They intentionally created an adversarial system of governance in order to build in intellectual diversity and accountability, but intended that system to operate for the common good. The point of creating the United States was to leverage the industry and resources of many States, held together by rule of law and shared values.  Their shared goal was to unite rather than divide.

          Our Founders were profoundly divided on slavery, State vs. Federal power, the role of Government, and how a government should be established and constituted. These are huge issues, but yet these men were committed to establishing a single nation. In order to do so, they based their work on shared assumptions and values. Currently, our values and assumptions are used by others to divide us.

          What values enabled transcendence of differences? The Founding Fathers shared Enlightenment values of reason, tolerance, self-determinism, liberty, and freedom. These values enabled people with profound differences to collectively innovate and govern. Political opponents were not the "enemy", but fellow Americans. All were risking their life to create and establish a shared vision.

         

          In 1782, the Continental Congress proposed the use of the phrase E Pluribus Unum "out of many, one" to describe an unprecedented form of governance. We combined nation-states into a single collective political body. While the phrase has specific meaning within political science and philosophy, our Founders intended a broader inclusive enfranchisement of all citizens into a common People. This sentiment was derived from Augustine's 4th Century use of the phrase.  

          Should we adopt the values of the Founding Fathers and build anew together? There can be no building if we're focused on differences or divisions. What values can we all adopt that will help us work together and move our nation forward?

Liberty and Compromise

          Reason and liberty are probably the two most important values enabling our nation's founding. A shared objective was the creation of a common nation out of many. So reason enabled compromise and liberty framed the outcomes. For example, modern interpretations are that our nation was founded to provide religious freedom. It was not. Various peoples sought religious liberty, and then promptly established their brand as a State religion. We had two major blocks of State religion within the colonies when the Constitution was written. The shared value of liberty enabled the free exercise of religion and abolished the State religions. Core Enlightenment values enabled compromise on the political, economic, and moral issues facing the Founders.

         

          Ours was a nation based on rational compromise. It was Enlightenment values and their political expression which challenged and transformed the world. Compromise and subsequent progress was a defining characteristic of the United States and what made our nation great. Is rational compromise still a defining characteristic? What core values might we choose to adopt to renew our nation?

A Way Forward?

          We have seen that the intention of the Founding Fathers was a unified nation reflecting values of reason, self-determinism, liberty and freedom. We can see how different are our political sensibilities and instincts. Will we challenge and re-create the "system" or comply to the tyranny of the conventional? Will we be told the rules, or shall we determine the rules?

          We may need to challenge and rethink long held conventions. For example, the Founding Fathers would doubtlessly be appalled at business entities accorded civil rights or that money equates to free speech. If money is free speech, I note that your voice and my voice are getting fainter and fainter in the sea of corporate lobbyists, propaganda machines and political coalitions. Best Government money can buy.  

          All bureaucracy increases itself. We may need to reverse that trend in Government. Renewing our nation will require clarity of vision, values, purpose and decision criteria. Having these was much of the "genius" of our Founding Fathers.

          Our vision and purpose has to be forward looking. A central theme in politics these days involves seeking or restoring something that is lost...the American Dream, "traditional" values, being number one, creating the rules of how the global game is played. A problem with bemoaning a lost past is that it is unrecoverable. You can't go home again. We all want to visit Mayberry, Floyd and Aunt Bee, but they are dead and gone. We might lose our childhood dreams, but we can dream new dreams.

          Another concern with dwelling on the past is that it is dangerous. It is a fundamental denial of present reality. It's like driving a car while fixated on the rear view mirror. Like the Founding Fathers, our collective questions should concern where we're going and how to get there.

          A final issue is that the Founding Fathers focused on the common good. That's the purpose for forming the country. Our civic and social responsibility is so fragmented that our society is dependent on Government and the Courts to promote social progress and justice. This was not our intended model. Our Government is not designed for this.

          As there is a disconnect between civic responsibility and social need, there is a disconnect between profit and social benefit. Labor spent a century connecting profit to worker benefit. Hard work was rewarded. Now owning the company is rewarded. This is a huge and crucial recent historical development. It is easy to forget that business was forced to imcrease wages and benefits and create a Middle Class and American Dream. Why is the Middle Class vanishing? The relationship between profit and benefit has been severed. Who will restore it and what will it take to make this happen?

          One can yearn for the past of Reagan, Mayberry or the Founding Fathers. One should not dwell in the past but be informed by it. We can cruise along fixated on the rear view mirror, put on the cruise control and take a nap while our future is written by others, or follow the example of the Founding Fathers, clean our windshield and boldly work together to create a bright, prosperous future.