Unlike Machiavelli, whose reading seems to be mandatory for political leaders around the world, the American founding fathers held an almost unique view.
Unlike most nations of the time, they rejected the view that a nation, its leaders and government and laws, are selected in Heaven, and are thus only capable of being changed by themselves or by Heaven. And to oppose such leaders or bad laws was somehow offensive to Heaven.
Instead, they adopted the notion that, even if following religious principles, our laws are written by men, and as such are imperfect, so can be changed by men.
Western political philosophy typically takes one of four forms. Idealistic or realistic; and optimistic or pessimistic.
Europe had been tormented by war for well over a thousand years, so for the most part, its idealism had been burned out of it. Likewise had its optimism. Instead their collective opinion was that “Things will go on like this for a long time, slowly getting worse.” So they tended to have a Realistic and Pessimistic political philosophy, which still predominates today.
America was bright, fresh, and full of optimism. But while there were some who were Idealistic about it, most Americans were very Realistic in their political philosophy, and we still are today. (There are enough Idealistic Pessimists to form their own political party, but most people don’t care for that sort of thing.)
In any event, the American Founding Fathers considered some of the great philosophical questions of their time, and reached some unique conclusions.
“Is mankind inherently good or evil?”
If you believe either side of this question, it will impact your views of government. If people are inherently good, then the government they create will also be good, so the more government, the better. (You can see how this can backfire.)
If people are inherently evil, then government will also be evil. So you want a small, weak government, that can never be trusted or relied on. (Also problematic.)
So instead, the Founding Fathers concluded that mankind was *neither* good or evil, but instead, that they were *weak*. This meant the government they designed strove to never give anyone or any group too much power, and should have other groups with different interests, to act as checks and balances on each other.
Looking at our Constitution, it is quite clearly an effort to create such checks and balances at every opportunity. And this has proven to be both stable and durable over time.
They have made that abundantly clear. Anyone who denies that fact is either delusional or an enemy of the Republic.
I hereby call on all red states legislatures to start the Constitutional Convention process, now!!!!!!!!!
Okay - what H double toothpicks is going on with the center justified text?
Okay - what H double toothpicks is going on with the center justified text?
Nevermind
Curious, posting seems to have corrected it?
Well done, Mr. Dodsworth. BTTP
Does the party corruption run so deep that even the state legislators are also members of the Deep State that we need to vanquish?