There is plenty of room at the table for differences of opinion. People don’t always have to agree, but in order for this country to have a chance, we must all actually wish to see a better America. We must all love America and root for its success. We must be willing to change our imperfect union through the advocacy of good ideas.
However, what and who we are battling is not a different opinion of how to achieve the American dream- we are battling radicalism that hates this country to its very core. We are battling leftists who do not seek to mold the clay of America; we are battling a left that seeks to squash it.
Nothing illustrates this point more than the recent op-ed by Louis Michael Seidman, a professor of constitutional law at Georgetown University, who actually advocates that we give up this “vile” thing called the Constitution. Seriously.
Seidman, who boasts that he has taught Constitutional Law for 40 years, wrote,
“AS the nation teeters at the edge of fiscal chaos, observers are reaching the conclusion that the American system of government is broken. But almost no one blames the culprit: our insistence on obedience to the Constitution, with all its archaic, idiosyncratic and downright evil provisions…
Our obsession with the Constitution has saddled us with a dysfunctional political system, kept us from debating the merits of divisive issues and inflamed our public discourse. Instead of arguing about what is to be done, we argue about what James Madison might have wanted done 225 years ago.”
We argue about what is the best course by remembering that to re-obtain the prosperity of America in yesteryear, we must try and govern as they did when American policy made sense. What do you do when you lost something? You go back to the last place you saw it. In this instance, we have lost independence, self-reliance, freedom from government intrusion and representative democracy with an emphasis on representation for the people. To see these fine things once again, we must ask ourselves what smarter men than we might have considered. To those who are not unbearably pompous and arrogant, it is no crime to emulate the governing practices of better leaders long dead.
“As someone who has taught constitutional law for almost 40 years, I am ashamed it took me so long to see how bizarre all this is. Imagine that after careful study a government official — say, the president or one of the party leaders in Congress — reaches a considered judgment that a particular course of action is best for the country. Suddenly, someone bursts into the room with new information: a group of white propertied men who have been dead for two centuries, knew nothing of our present situation, acted illegally under existing law and thought it was fine to own slaves might have disagreed with this course of action. Is it even remotely rational that the official should change his or her mind because of this divination?”
There it is! The classic liberal delegitimization of our founding fathers because they owned slaves at a time when, sadly, the Southern agrarian-based economy rested on slave labor. Perfect. Nevermind that many Northerners despised the practice. Nevermind that many Southerners did as well. Let’s throw out their brilliant ideas of governance based on their tacit cooperation with an entrenched part of American society.
“[P]erhaps the dream of a country ruled by ‘We the people’ is impossibly utopian. If so, we have to give up on the claim that we are a self-governing people who can settle our disagreements through mature and tolerant debate. But before abandoning our heritage of self-government, we ought to try extricating ourselves from constitutional bondage so that we can give real freedom a chance.”
I believe what he’s describing is anarchy. Anarchy exists when we reject the foundational principles of our rules of law. We have an amendment process to amend imperfections in the Constitution. But that’s not good enough for the radicals. They seek destruction of our society and a rebuilding from the ashes in their modern, socialist visions.
That’s what is at stake here. Make no mistake- the left aims not for cooperation to the same ends, they seek a trampling of the right.