Posted on 09/23/2005 10:22:35 AM PDT by kiriath_jearim
GUEST COLUMN | JEFF MANKOFF
Published Thursday, September 22, 2005
Putting an end to Constitution worship
This past Saturday was something called "Constitution Day," though, except for some obnoxious fliers around campus put up by the Orwellian-sounding Committee for Freedom, you can be forgiven for not knowing that.
Constitution Day is a new quasi-holiday foisted upon us by Congress at the behest of Sen. Robert Byrd to force schools receiving public money -- including Yale -- to set aside time on the anniversary of the document's adoption in 1787 to teach about the Constitution.
This holiday is another ridiculous example of the "sanctimonious reverence," as Thomas Jefferson termed it, in which many Americans hold the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. Both documents no doubt played important roles in the American colonies' struggle to free themselves from British rule and establish a new nation. Recognizing them as crucial pieces of American history is one thing, but worshiping them like sacred texts goes too far.
The Constitution in particular needs to be stripped of much of the mystic awe surrounding it, since it continues to shape American political life, yet suffers from serious flaws. Many of these flaws could be corrected by wise legislation, if only legislators, and the public, were not so deeply attached to the Constitution that they cringe before any attempt to substantively alter it.
The Constitution, while laying the foundation for the creation of a great American nation, was also very much a product of its time. Though it has mostly aged well, the Constitution has also given us a rigid 18th-century political system not always well suited to the modern world. Even with its amendments, the document is fraught with problems too rarely acknowledged by politicians or the public.
As Yale political scientist Robert Dahl has pointed out, the Constitution is grossly undemocratic. Since Wyoming, with fewer than 500,000 inhabitants, has the same clout in the Senate as California, with almost 34 million, each Wyomingite counts 68 times as much as each Californian. The Constitution is also responsible for burdening us with the Electoral College, a body designed to purposely undermine popular sovereignty. The 2000 election, when Al Gore outpolled George Bush but was denied the presidency by the Electoral College (with an assist by the Supreme Court), is the most recent example of 18th-century oligarchy trampling 21st-century democracy.
Besides being undemocratic, the Constitution is also, in places, just poorly written. Take the Second Amendment, which mentions the need for a well-regulated militia and conferring the right to bear arms. Because of the Framers' unclear wording, no one has been able to establish definitively whether this right belongs only to the militia or to individuals. The easiest and fairest solution would be to just rewrite the Second Amendment, but because the Constitution has taken on the aura of sanctity in our political culture, there is little likelihood of that happening.
Adhering to the Framers' "original intent," as many conservatives would have us do, is a recipe for oligarchy (which was, after all, what the Framers wanted). Creating the Electoral College and denying the vote to women, blacks and poor people were both part of the Framers' desire to keep power in the hands of people like themselves (and I have a sneaking suspicion many "strict constructionalists" would prefer things that way). The main alternative -- seeing the Constitution as a "living document" subject to constant reinterpretation -- is also anti-democratic, since it allows the judiciary to usurp power from the elected legislative branch. The Constitution needs changing, but it should not be up to the courts to change it.
Some of the Constitution's worst features have, it is true, been corrected by amendment -- though in the case of ending slavery and giving blacks the vote, the price was civil war. The Framers deliberately made changing the Constitution difficult, but at the price of a rigidity that has made the U.S. political system ossified and anachronistic. Jefferson argued that each generation should modify the Constitution to fit its own times, since "each generation has the same right of self-government [as] the past one." Jefferson's modest regard of the Constitution as an edifice in need of constant repair is a much better way of think of our nation's most important document than the sanctimony that has given us "Constitution Day."
[Jeff Mankoff is a sixth-year Ph.D. student in the History Department.]
Jeff Mankoff is a sixth-year Ph.D. student in the History Department.
He has a sixth-year, third-grader's grasp on the history, as well as the legal, political, and societal underpinnings of our nation.
Seriously, he must eat lead paint chips with his lunch each day.
--As Yale political scientist Robert Dahl has pointed out, the Constitution is grossly undemocratic. Since Wyoming, with fewer than 500,000 inhabitants, has the same clout in the Senate as California, with almost 34 million, each Wyomingite counts 68 times as much as each Californian.--
That's because we're a republic, not a democracy, you moron.
There's a reason we're called the united STATES of America, not the united PEOPLE of America.
Oh, the horrors of learning about the Constitution at Yale.
The admission that "it has aged well" speaks volumes in itself.
Future star of the Democratic Party in the making!
Yea, yea, yea...if only we could strip the constitution of those quaint notions of individual freedom, keeping and bearing arms, etc...then folks like this nitwit could enlighten us all and be free to develop another socialist utopia on earth.
As if folks of his ilk aren't already making far too much progress towards that misbegotten end anyway.
This huy, IMHO, and his Phd are just more of that "Piled Higher and Deeper" definition.
That new constitution every week thing has sure worked well for France.
(Subtext of this lefty's article is that what we need is, "a constitution that we can easily shape to our ever leftward leaning progressive notions of what's acceptable or desirable, such as abortion, gay marriage etc. What Mr. Lefty PHD doesn't understand is a constitution with the rigdidity of a piece of warm play dough, could just as easily take away everything he probably holds dear, such as wealth redistribution, abortion on demand etc.)
Holy crap. Nice to see what kind of PhDs the history program is turning out.
The balancing body is called the House of Representatives. Learn about it.
The Electoral College is a further check and balance against the inbreeding of the intellectual elite in their small caves called "Major Cities". Learn about it.
And by the way, Mr. Mankoff, you represent the oligarchy-- so to call this a victory is kinda misleading.
Wow!
And he has the nerve to call "Constitution worshipers" sanctimonious?
People need to start looking past the end of their noses when they review history. .
He has a Doctorate in history and he thinks the USA is a democracy?
The Constitution was clearly a product of its time, and of compromise. One of its basic functions was to limit government power.
The author of this article clearly does not understand this, and he thinks that it is undesirable. He seems to worship at the altar of "Democracy".
There is a clear means of altering the Constitution by means of amendment. In view of the overwhelming success of the Constitution in creating the wealthiest, most powerful and most free country in the world, it is up to those who wish to alter the basic contract of our country to make that case that such change is necessary and desirable.
IMHO, the author failed miserably in making any such case.
God forbid college kids might have to learn about the bedstone of this nation.
Well that's just plain sad.
LOL... Man, these people are stupid! And Yale will reward this dork with a doctorate.
Another pissant exposes himself. Do you think another six years of acadamecia will cure it? I think not.
Yale - your tax $$ at work. YGTBSM.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.