I was taught (in many classes) that the French Revolution was a great thing and, although different, was every bit as glorious and wonderful as the American Revolution.
But it wasn't. It was a bloody socialist massacre which led to a military dictatorship.
I was taught (in many classes) that Marbury v Madison was a great court case which instantly transformed this nation's understanding of what the Supreme Court would be.
But it didn't do that. That's a later interpretation. It's a way of using the SCOTUS in the 20th century in a new way, while simply pretending that "we've always done it this way".
We've all been sold a bill of goods, on many topics. The country we are living in today is NOT the country the Founders meant for us to have.
I agree, particularly with the “we’ve always done it this way” notion.
To a certain degree, that’s what makes being a citizen historian so easy. The lies have become so big that they have more holes in them than swiss cheese.
And we have far too many among us who don’t ask deep enough questions. Many topics at this point are low hanging fruit.
The vast bulk of my education and work was on technical subjects (STEM), and that doesn't carry the BS baggage that is prevalent in the social arts. Naturally kept distant from the societal subversion that had been going on. Somebody gave me a Robert White Duck Book in the late 1970's, which piqued my interest.
The fringe is getting longer these days ;-)
I am so tired of this attempt to argue that the supreme Court does not have a legitimate power of constitutional review. That is a power express in the Constitution and one that was intended so says Alexander Hamilton in Federalist #78.
Folks who don't like activist judges need to get over it. The disease is not the Supreme Court but in the political branches that fail to nominate and confirm judges who will adhere to the laws.