RUNNING HEAD: The Value of the American Founding

The American Founding and the need for its application today Jacob Lettier

The Value of the American Founding

The American Founding and the need for its application today It would be truly great if we as a nation had the capability to seek out the opinion of our great founding fathers by means of experiencing how they would rate the legitimacy of our government today. Despite this not being quite the case, there is still a rather large plurality of resources one can utilize for the understanding of our founding ideology and how it was put to use. With ever grateful anxiousness, it becomes clear, for someone looking for truth in the matter over what role is best suited for government, that one inevitably discovers how our founding fathers strove to bring forth an immortal message that would carry on from the beginning of this country's formation. This message beholden unto our constitution, our laws, and our history can guide this nation into an overall continued path of prosperity. The task at hand however is the effort to indubitably feel secure in the truth and accuracy of ones definition of the founding message. Importance of integrity concerning scholarly research is kept in mind with fervent conformity today and must be so, for not knowing the truth in this age can leave one unprepared in events of global conflict and economic collapse. From quantitative easing to fair housing acts, it is pertinent to know what is going on behind the veil of the supposed transparency of government. Let it not be forgotten as we direct our eyes to the words of Thomas Jefferson, who wrote, "It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself" (Thompson, 2010, p.22). When ones generation inherits the obligations of preserving the state, it is a matter of duty to keep alive the founding voice of the past by respecting it enough to never brandish its truth in passing. For every American, it is pertinent to have an understanding of a substantive definition of what this countrys founding ideology truly was. Can there be truth in the matter of possibly fraudulent beginnings of this country that would fundamentally destroy the credibility of our

The Value of the American Founding

founding intent? By avoiding the self-refuting theory of Global Skepticism, one in which claims that no truth can ever be fully made certain of, it is evident that the history man holds today reveals the past surrounding our founders to be fully constructed of recorded acts having been influenced by Christian principles. This history cannot be disputed with any means of standardized citing procedures or logical counter arguments. It is logically certain that the founders use of discernment was such a method that can be labeled a conservative approach. This approach is seemingly the least flawed when compared to other points on a political spectrum. Though today, the consensus of some opposing groups is that points on a political spectrum have no comparative value between one point and another. Some argue that there is no existence of a truly righteous ideology with the best balance of morality, prosperity, defined rights, as well as other virtuous traits. However, this is a relativist approach and of which this argument does not seek to dispute, but it rather consists of a desire to represent how reestablishing our founding intent can save this country from oppression and economic collapse by deterring The Progressive Movement. But first, it is necessary to differentiate the ideology of the founding from the ideology controlling the American government today. This being said, it may seem natural for someone who can understand another's beliefs concerning society, law, government, family, and other concepts of a relative nature to see how this information seems to unlock the mystery of that individuals ideology by what position that person takes in regards to those concepts. Thus, it is this generalization, viewed in the eyes of a politically scientific perspective, that this argument assumes in order to establish that there are, in fact, points on an existent political spectrum residing in thought. And with these points, one can discern with logical rationale and accredited research that ideologies on this spectrum are mostly flawed to a high degree. It is this argument that will hopefully be the burst of inspiration to

The Value of the American Founding

cause the epiphany concerning the assurance of righteous ideological definition in morality for those with ideologies seeking the social safety net we currently attempt to provide today. Under the aforementioned assumption, it is obvious to realize what tight range of points on that political spectrum our founding fathers belong. Without a doubt, their ideologies are closely knit with conservative fundamentals. How else can it be that this countries holds dear the cherished words of George Washington, who said once simply, "It is impossible to rightly govern a nation without God and the Bible (Thompson, 2010, p. 18). Is it so that if a nation lead by the Bible must also be out of necessity a conservative entity? Indeed, because conservative principles were founded from teachings of the Bible (Thompson, 2010). Our constitution was based on English Common Law, and that doctrine stemmed from the word of God (Thompson, 2010). For the Founders, domestic policy concentrated on securing the persons and properties of the people against violence by means of a tough criminal law against murder, rape, robbery, and so on (Thompson, 2010). Further, the civil law had to provide for the poor to have access to acquiring property by allowing the buying and selling of labor and property through voluntary contracts and a legal means of establishing undisputed ownership. The burden of proof was on government if there was to be any limitation on the free use of that property (Thompson, 2010). Laws regulating sexual conduct aimed at the formation of lasting marriages so that children would be born and provided for by those whose interest and love was most likely to lead to their proper care. With this common sense approach to defining the party responsible for tending to the welfare of incapable people, it was their respective families that the conservative minds at the time viewed to be accountable for their care (Thompson, 2010).

The Value of the American Founding

This argument must once again steer the definition of its purpose more narrowly so as not to claim opposition to those arguing from an atheistic or religious perspective. This argument grounds itself in the reality of Christ and does not look at it religiously, but rather something that simply is. This argument strategizes this approach because its understanding of a reality that includes Christ and of which is wholly constituted of Christ which is indubitably founded upon arguments too complex to include in the supportive premises of this arguments conclusive purposes without such writings destroying this arguments conformity to the issue at hand. However, it strives to prove that the words of our founding fathers bring fruitful evidence that their ideologies were that of a conservative disposition. How can anyone possibly misinterpret the words of John Jay who wrote with pride as a Christian, "Only one adequate plan has ever appeared in the world, and that is the Christian dispensation" (Thompson, 2010, p. 19). It is amazing that there exists individuals who think that the founders and even Christ were leftists; this thought can be maddening to those that put forth the effort to discern what image the average moral person portrayed at the time of our founding. People in that age were far more aware of the dangers surrounding the left because those were people experiencing the beginning and end stage of what scholars call the Alexander Tytler Cycle of Democracy (Tytler, 1850). Born a Scottish lawyer and historical scholar, Tytler examined the history of Greek representative governments and found a startling cycle that roughly consisted of two centuries. Tytler would suggest that the life of a republic is cyclic. The birth of which is caused by the bondage of a tyrannical state. With this in effect, it is spiritual faith that gives the oppressed courage to fight for liberty. As the oppressed become liberated, the product of such a process is abundance. Sadly though, selfishness becomes more influential as the abundance is envied by those not willing to rightfully attain it themselves. Once the acts of selfishness infect the

The Value of the American Founding

government, people generally become complacent and are no longer defensive against the incremental reduction of the abundance past generations toiled for. Thus we as a people also become apathetic towards the forces that seek to move us back into bondage. Therefore, the people, once again, depart into bondage and the cycle begins a new revolution (Tytler, 1850). The age of our founding was at the time of our spiritual awakening, which was the driving force of rebellion aimed at the British government. Again, at this time people were more aware that their chances of having a Christian founded government, free of the will of Britain, was at many times incapable of confidently foretelling a strong future for an independent America (Thompson, 2010). With striking similarity amongst their trends, many nations today are steering towards capitalism because they are beginning to see that they are now almost fully engaged in the portion of the cycle concerning a time of government tyranny; Colonial America was also experiencing a massive shutdown on their natural rights (Pietrusza, 2008). Perhaps this cycle cannot be short circuited, that it can be more or less attributable to the life cycle of civilization. However, just as the founding intent seeks to short circuit this cycle, so does this argument. What a beautiful portrayal of a country it would be if the founding had continued to apply to American government. No more would our country be infested with corrupted bait promising a comfortable standard of living for all those who supposedly never had a chance in a capitalistic setting. This countys natural rights would no longer be stifled but rather protected against infringement. Instead, they have been replaced by rights granting things of a material nature. This world behaves the reverse of the time when it was held with a firm grip of traditional moral and economic views. In what other time is it acceptable to impose traditionally perverse acts but condemn Christians who herald their renown with pride in public mediums? Why is it that some

The Value of the American Founding

public schools push for transgender bathrooms but institutionally smother the communication of Christian topics or religious speech at all (Green, 2010)? At this point, it takes a keen sense of discernment to understand that this seemingly upside down world was calculated by the progressive movement and other machines of leftist engineering (Pietrusza, 2008). The history of the progressive movement is almost exclusively responsible for the leftist aspects of our government today (Pietrusza, 2008). The following will attempt to make aware of the ideology behind progressivism and demonstrate how it is that this doctrine seeks to establish the idea that man is capable of perfection (Lippman, 1993). The progressive reform movement took root in the late nineteenth century and still continues to exist in the midst of the leftist machine operating. This movement has evolved and continues to be the founding ideology that many leftists base their beliefs on. For example, Hilary Clinton in the 2008 presidential campaign claimed to be a neo-progressive (Pietrusza, 2008). This stemmed from a question of how she feels it means to be a liberal. Indeed, it was the progressive mentality that transmogrified into liberalism and then to harder leftist policy like the New Deal (Pietrusza, 2008). Todays Liberalism and the policies generated by it arose from a conscious repudiation of the American founding. It became evident for progressives during the early 19th century that the questions arisen from the context of the rapid changes brought upon by the industrial revolution and the development of modern capitalism needed to be addressed. The progressives believed that these changes marked an end to America's current conservative policy and a new world order was appropriate to manage this fresh age of industrialization (Pietrusza, 2008). It is important to know, however, that the Progressive Era has within it many different representations, such as the literature of Upton Sinclair, the history of Charles Beard, the educational system of John Dewey, and the architecture of Frank Lloyd Wright. In terms of

The Value of the American Founding

political progressivism, the movement is more closely associated with political figures by the names of Woodrow Wilson and Theodore Roosevelt and thinkers such as Herbert Croly and Charles Merriam. One such figure working to define this ideology was Walter Lippman, the author of the Phantom Public. He was instrumental in forming the idea that a collective effort must be undergone to marry the perfection of individuals through eugenics to the perfection of individuals from public policy (Lippman, 1993). This meant that an ideology such as this finds that the role of the governments purpose is to produce a new breed of man ever working to perfect it biologically and mentally. While the Progressives differed in their assessment of the problems and how to resolve them, they generally shared in common the view that government at every level must be actively involved in these reforms. The existing constitutional system was outdated and they worked to make it into a dynamic and evolving instrument of social change, aided by scientific knowledge and the development of administrative bureaucracy. With this movement, the old system was to revamp into a state of heightened democracy (Pietrusza, 2008). Such changes were seen with the addition of direct elections of senators, initiatives, referendums, and open primaries. This change also came with a cost, and therefore the progressives made provisions to support the spending with the unconstitutional addition of the Sixteenth Amendment and the progressive income tax (Pietrusza, 2008). With the American forum now more applicable to a greater democratic state, political candidates could lure the vote in their direction by leading it with entitlements and grant promises. All the while, presidential leadership steered the governmental vessel, embarking towards the movements vision. Woodrow Wilson was a devout progressive and based his ideology on Darwinian principles concerning a relativist approach to interpret the constitution; for he wrote, All that progressives

The Value of the American Founding

ask or desire, is permission -- in an era when development, evolution, is a scientific word -- to interpret the Constitution according to the Darwinian principle; all they ask is recognition of the fact that a nation is a living thing and not a machine (Pietrusza, 2008, p. 58). The Progressive goal of politics is freedom, now understood as freedom from the limits imposed by nature and necessity. They rejected the Founders' conception of freedom as useful for self-preservation for the sake of the individual pursuit of happiness. For the Progressives, freedom is redefined as the fulfillment of human capacities, which becomes the primary task of the state. Hailed by his own, John Dewey was a powerful representative voice in the name of progressivism. He once wrote, The state has the responsibility for creating institutions under which individuals can effectively realize the potentialities that are theirs (Pietrusza, 2008, p. 47). So although he said, "It is true that social arrangements, laws, institutions are made for man, rather than that man is made for them," these laws and institutions "are not means for obtaining something for individuals, not even happiness. They are means of creating individuals. Individuality in a social and moral sense is something to be wrought out (Pietrusza, 2008, p. 47). This is the sum of how fundamentally disfigured our country has become from when it used to protect peoples natural rights to it being responsible for creating individuals social image and purpose. If it were left up to the proofs of common sense regarding the natural rights endowment granted to every man, the nation would not fear for their own individual ability to be independent. For the Founders, the purpose of government is to protect the private sphere, which they regarded as the proper home of God, religion, and science, as well as providing for the needs of the body (Thompson, 2010). The experience of religious persecution had convinced the

The Value of the American Founding

10

Founders that government was incompetent at directing man in his highest endeavors (Thompson, 2010). The requirements of liberty, they thought, meant that self-interested private associations had to be permitted, not because they are good in themselves, but because depriving individuals of freedom of association would deny the liberty that is necessary for the health of society and the flourishing of the individual (Thompson, 2010). For the Founders, although government was grounded in divine law (i.e., the laws of nature and of nature's God), government was seen as merely a human thing, bound up with all the strengths and weaknesses of human nature (Thompson, 2010). Government had to be limited both because it was dangerous if it got too powerful and because it was not supposed to provide for the highest things in life (Thompson, 2010). Because of the Progressives' tendency to view the state as divine and nature as crude, they no longer looked upon the private sphere as that which was to be protected by government. Instead, the realm of the private was seen as the realm of selfishness and oppression. Private property was especially singled out for criticism. Some Progressives openly or covertly spoke of themselves as socialists (Pietrusza, 2008). Woodrow Wilson did so in an unpublished writing. A society like the Founders' that limits itself to protecting life, liberty, and property was one in which, as Wilson wrote with only slight exaggeration, all that government had to do was to put on a policeman's uniform and say, 'Now don't anybody hurt anybody else (Pietrusza, 2008, p. 93). Wilson thought that such a society was unable to deal with the conditions of modern times (Pietrusza, 2008). Wilson rejected the earlier view that "the ideal of government was for every man to be left alone and not interfered with, except when he interfered with somebody else; and that the best government was the government that did as little governing as possible (Pietrusza, 2008, p.

The Value of the American Founding

11

102). He believed a government of this kind is unjust because it leaves men at the mercy of predatory corporations (Pietrusza, 2008). Without government management of those corporations, Wilson thought, the poor would be destined to indefinite victimization by the wealthy (Pietrusza, 2008). Previous limits on government power must be abolished (Pietrusza, 2008). Accordingly, progressive political scientist Theodore Woolsey wrote, "The sphere of the state may reach as far as the nature and needs of man and of men reach, including intellectual and aesthetic wants of the individual, and the religious and moral nature of its citizens (Pietrusza, 2008, p. 116). However, this transformation is still in the future, for progress takes place through historical development. A sign of the Progressives' unlimited trust in unlimited political authority is Dewey's remark in his "Ethics of Democracy" that Plato's Republic presents us with the "perfect man in the perfect state" (Pietrusza, 2008, p.171) What Plato's Socrates had presented as a thought experiment to expose the nature and limits of political life is taken by Dewey to be a laudable obliteration of the private sphere by government mandate. In a remark that the Founders would have found repugnant, Progressive political scientist John Burgess wrote that "the most fundamental and indispensable mark of statehood" was "the original, absolute, unlimited, universal power over the individual subject, and all associations of subjects (Pietrusza, 2008, p. 144)." If it is one remark that may be heartened with memorable fervor, let it be that there are ways to short circuit the Tytler Cycle of Democracy, for the selfishness is seen in the supporters of pork barrel agenda. When it becomes apparent that people can elect themselves ill-gotten gain, the liberated environment cannot be sustained and the free markets become inefficient. One can say that it is self-beneficial to vote for someone on grounds of material promises, however, that

The Value of the American Founding

12

candidate will dare not tell you what they receive in exchange, and that is control over the constituents as well as others lives. The US for example has sought to create a social safety net since the beginning of the Progressive Movement, but in order for it to be maintained, the individuals ability to preserve their own security and progress increasingly becomes less possible as the safety net becomes more comprehensive. As the private sector is taxed to support the safety net, less and less becomes the size of the economic pie because of the stifling effect the percentage of tax it takes to maintain the net. If this nation would once again put its faith in God, no longer would those, who stay current with the times, see the global meltdown of the pillars of free market enterprise. Even now, destined taxpaying people born into this country assume over a million dollars of government debt, at birth, due to the nations unfunded liabilities, which amounts to over 120 trillion dollars (Pietrusza, 2008). Clearly this path of unchecked spending cannot possibly continue. If the founding intent is not restored, this country is doomed for a total economic reset that will yield a fully inclusive tyrannical state before this century ends.

The Value of the American Founding

13

Works Cited Green, Randiah. (2010). LGBT, Student Senate push for gender-neutral restrooms at UT. Toledo, OH: The Independent Collegian. Lippman, Walter. (1993). The Phantom Public. New York, NY: Transaction Publishers. Pietrusza, David. (2008). 1920, The Year of The Six Presidents. New York, NY: Basic Books. Thompson, Gerald R. (2010). Legal Foundations: Framework of Law. Livonia, MI: Lonang Institute. Tytler, Alexander Fraser. (1850). Universal History, From the Creation of the World to the Beginning of the Eighteenth Century. Boston: Fetridge and Company.