By Alan
Caruba
The polls
and the pundits tell us that the people of the United States of America are
deeply divided politically and they’re right.
A bit of
history helps to understand this.
The former
colonies that later became the states when they accepted a federal form of
government were always divided, along with their citizens, a goodly portion of
whom did not want to declare independence and go to war with Great Britain.
After it became clear that the Articles of Confederation were useless, a group
of wealthy elites got together in Philadelphia and, in the greatest secrecy,
scrapped the Articles and wrote our revered Constitution.
Fortunately,
this group—now called the “framers” or “founders”—were highly educated for
their time, most were successful businessmen and/or farmers. However, to call
George Washington, who presided at the meeting, a farmer was an understatement.
Washington
owned thousands of acres and had many enterprises related to the crops he grew
with the assistance of several hundred slaves. Washington was one of the
wealthiest men in the nation. He and others may not have liked slavery, but
there were no tractors, harvesters, or other farm equipment of later eras.
Plows were still pulled by oxen or horses. If you wanted to get anywhere, you
either went on foot, by horse, in a carriage, or by boat.
Washington,
having led the armies of the aspiring American nation to victory over eight
years, was a universally revered commander who had ultimately demanded and got
complete control over the military from a generally useless continental
congress that notoriously failed to pay the army.
When the
Constitution has been ratified by enough states to become the new government of
the new nation, there was never any question in anyone’s mind as to who should
be its first President. As Harlow Giles Unger, the author of a new, excellent
book, “Mr. President”: George Washington and the Making of the Nation’s Highest
Office”, makes clear “…in one of the defining events in the creation of the
U.S. presidency, Washington startled his countrymen by ignoring the
constitution limits on presidential powers and ordering troops to crush tax
protests by American citizens—much as the British government had tried, and
failed, to do in the years leading up to the American Revolution.” History and
life is filled with ironies.
Unger
makes clear an aspect of our history that is generally unknown, but based on
Washington’s experience with the Continental Congress during the Revolution,
“from the moment he took office in the spring of 1789, Washington was obsessed
with establishing the President as ‘the supreme power to govern the general
concerns of a confederated republic.’ Fearing anarchy, disunion, and an end to
American freedom if he failed to act decisively, he transformed himself—and the
presidency—from a relatively impotent figurehead into America’s most powerful
leader, creating what modern scholars have called the ‘imperial presidency.’”
Over the
eight years of his two terms as the nation’s first President, Washington turned
the office into one that “controlled executive appointments, foreign policy,
military affairs, government finances, and federal law enforcement, along with
the power to legislate by presidential proclamation and to issue secret fiats
under the cloak of executive privilege.”
I share
this with you because it is useful to know that even Washington was called a
'usurper' of power in his day when there was still a lot of fear that an American
monarchy would be imposed. Despite the high regard with which Washington was
held, it took the power of his personality, his high level of leadership, and
his personal integrity to create the presidency that we still have to this day.
John Adams
served as Washington’s Vice President and observed that “The executive and the
legislative powers are natural rivals; and if each has not an effectual control
over the other, the weaker will ever be the lamb in the paws of the wolf. The
nation which will not adopt an equilibrium of power must adopt a despotism.
There is no alternative. Rivalries must be controlled or they will throw things
into confusion.”
After five
years of Obama as President, we have seen that equilibrium swing back and forth
and, indeed, this has been the history of the three branches of our government.
It is now swinging away from Obama as his former support wanes and the impact
of the aptly named Tea Party movement increases. The U.S. is only a year away
for his powers to be blunted by a Congress that is likely to swing in the
direction of conservative, Republican leadership.
As
stressful as the process is for everyone, this is the way the nation was
intended to be governed and the enmities that are inherent in that process are
the price we pay in a nation whose population is sharply divided between those
who have little knowledge of our history or of the manner in which we have
emerged from many crises in the past and grown stronger.
This is
not a time for despair. It is a time to harness the power of the people who
hold the Constitution in high regard and to vote for those who share that
regard.
© Alan
Caruba, 2013
3 comments:
very well stated.
As the Affordable Health Care Act stumbles along, it becomes clear that such an extraordinary change in the law of the land is being run by a mediocre lot. Yet regardless of how many failures and people who claim responsibility no one is fired, only moved about, or allowed to quit out of the public scrutiny, i.e. Hillary Clinton, "what difference does it make?". People have to pay attention and speak up.
Good posting. Many people have no idea how the country started and don't realize how adversarial the branches of government have always been.
I also remind people who say "our nation was never more divided" that we had a civil war. While people associate Lincoln with a good time in American history, in reality, Lincoln presided over a civil war. You can't get more divided than that with completely splitting.
Post a Comment