3 Comments

Bravo, Bill. You take on the public's misunderstanding of what "democracy" meant when the Framers successfully prevented it in the Constitution, a misunderstanding that makes it extraordinarily hard to explain to the public what "democracy" means now, and why what the public thinks is "our Democracy" is not what we have. Since full democracy is now unconstitutional, blocked by what's left of the Framers' legacy, it will be extraordinarily hard for us to get it. My hope is that the old Right-wing view that a "republic is not a democracy" will not recur; and that it won't require civil war, as it did in the 1860s, to get the Constitution amended to make it more democratic.

Expand full comment

Timely piece Bill, and I’m firmly in the camp of admiring like you the ability of our nation to prosper and adapt to the compromise laden founding document. As well, the unique and unproven nature of our founding based on the socio/cultural/political realities of the age was not destined to succeed as many of that time assumed, hoped or feared. I’m amazed that we have lasted this far, and perhaps it was Providence indeed that cast its gaze in our experiment and willed it to succeed in spite of its peculiar founding.

Expand full comment
author

Thanks. I think it was less Providence and more the horrific carnage of the Civil War, which tore down the founders' Constitution and replaced it with a new one, though retaining some stubborn features of the old, as well as the violence suffered by those who put their bodies on the line to end racial segregation by law--plus some other achievements for equality that seem under threat now.

Expand full comment