American vision may no longer be sustainable
The philosopher, politician, administrators we refer to as the Founders when they conceived our country combined various governance principles and philosophical constructs from Locke, Tocqueville, (the) Roman republic, Greco democracy and related precepts into what became — The Declaration of Independence, The Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
Madison, Jefferson, Hamilton and others assembled these governing structures into the constitutional republic that, “WE The People” embraced and valued up until, seemingly, the recent past.
Most important, they presumed, expected and required that the vast majority of “WE The People” would agree to share, value and personify their founding guiding principles, like self-reliance and American exceptionalism and the autonomous pursuit of happiness, unfettered by government overreach and intervention. Again they grossly miscalculated.
The obvious schisms and divisions in America today are manifestations of the false assumptions and expectations that the Founders counted on, if our constitutional republic were to survive for centuries into the future. The obvious divide expressed today transcends liberal and conservative ideological boundaries. Democratic and Republican political divergencies aside, America’s vast majority no longer collectively agrees to share and value similar, agreed upon guiding principles and philosophical tenants set forth in (the) aforementioned founding documents. Today there appears to be at least two separate, incongruent interpretations of what America is and should be.
One view, held by perhaps half of 330 million Americans, places tremendous emphasis on skin color, sexual preference, race and conditions of origin, as determining factors that tend to define individual life outcomes. Further, this interpretation of America demands and expects that government is largely responsible for providing solutions and pathways to “the pursuit of happiness.” In this context, “WE The People,” are reduced to passive, not active citizens demanding and presuming that government should legislate our destinies. This interpretation of America also stresses “victimization” and “entitlement” as almost permanent conditions, meriting government interventions and benefits to provide for “the pursuit of happiness.” Individual outcomes are no longer “my responsibility,” and reliance on government becomes a lifestyle.
The second interpretation of what America should be, says that government should operate as an extrinsic force, not micromanaging its citizens and that skin color or sexual preference are incidental. This interpretation is much more demanding of “WE The People.” It enjoins individual citizens to perform self-reliance and actively “pursue happiness,” based on individual achievement and hard work, not contingent on identity, race or conditions of origin. This interpretation of America challenges each citizen to bear the burdens of achievement, to become educated, learn skills, pursue economic independence away from government and take responsibility for our individual “pursuits of happiness.”
America is seen as exceptional and government overreach is superfluous and intrusive. Most of all, it is up to the individual to manufacture his or her destiny, overcoming obstacles, including incidences of discrimination, poverty and not fixate on entitlement and victimization.
Whichever interpretation of America you subscribe to, the point is these two incompatible versions of America are irreconcilable like a bad dysfunctional marriage. Perhaps “forming a more perfect union” was and is nothing more than an unattainable ideal, partly because an evergrowing diverse nation can no longer agree on similar shared interpretations of what America is and should be? The Founders miscalculated — “WE The People and One Nation Under God, Indivisible,” is unfortunately, unsustainable.