Why do we care about what a bunch of Dead White Males thought, right? Besides, the Constitution is supposed to be a living, breathing document, so it changes. Those old dead guys were wrong, anyway.
If you think that this is new, modern thinking, I have news- news that illustrates just how deep our problem really is: this is similar to President Woodrow Wilson’s way of thinking.
Someone should write a book about Woodrow Wilson and his disdain for the principles of the American founding. Oops. Ronald J. Pestritto already did. His 2005 book, “Woodrow Wilson and the Roots of Modern Liberalism,” is well worth the read. It’s a little dry, so the reader cannot read it at the speed of a novel, but it is well worth it.
Our 28th president once wrote: “Jefferson was not a thorough American because of the strain of French philosophy that permeated and weakened all of his thought.” Further, abstract political thought is un-American, so Jefferson’s abstract thought “was un-American in being abstract, sentimental, and rationalistic rather than practical. That he held it sincerely need not be doubted; but the more sincerely he accepted it so much the more thoroughly was he un-American.”
And that’s just one Wilson quote, out of billions and billions.
Even Ted Kennedy, who vehemently shared Wilson’s opposition to natural rights, dared not express himself so nakedly about Jefferson. (Strike that. With Kennedy, perhaps that was a poor word choice, given his little romps at the family compound.)
Think of it this way: Today people pick apart Jefferson at the edges; Wilson went straight for the heart of the author of the Declaration of Independence.
Wilson was not the first progressive; however, he was the granddaddy of today’s progressive movement. Today the progressives hide their disdain for the Founding Fathers better than ol’ Woodrow did.
So what does it matter what a bunch of DWMs thought (worse, DWEMs- European males; bigger and badder and lacking people of color)? The answer is that it matters because the Founding Fathers understood many different world philosophies, human history, and human nature, and most were Christians. Human nature has not changed in 2,500 years, let alone 250 years. The Founders understood the natural courses societies take, and they understood that the natural arc for mankind is for the powerful, the rich, and the popular to become masters.
The Founders were not of one voice, and they believed in multiple shades of Liberty, but they all indeed believed in Liberty. They all understood how to avoid having the powerful, the rich, and the popular from becoming masters. They understood that corruption is a constant threat; that vigilance is not an option.
Is the Constitution a “living, breathing document,” as progressives claim? Actually, yes it is. We know it as the Amendment process. For example, the Founders knew that the issue of slavery could not be resolved at the time, and any attempt to prevent its continuation would have prevented the nation from forming, thus the need for “living, breathing.” A process had to exist for change at a later time.
Unfortunately, progressives such as Supreme Court Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer (to name two well known Lefties) believe that “living, breathing” means that the Constitution only means whatever judges decide that it means. Translation: it is meaningless. If words can be defined differently by different people, then words are meaningless. If Bill says “cruel and unusual” means one thing, Sharmen says it means another, and a Supreme Court justice, who never read the Constitution in Law School because law schools only teach what other Supreme Court judges have written over the years, says it means another, then legal chaos reigns.
Welcome to Progressive America.
And Woodrow Wilson is definitely one DWM about whom we should say, “Who cares what he thinks?!” Ah, but the progressives do care. Wilson’s legacy lives, and his dreams are still in the works. Better arm yourself with knowledge. We have to be ready to explain the Founding Fathers and their principles to others. Yes, it does matter what DWMs think; no, the Constitution is not meant to be interpreted to match the times, as if in 2016 we should not concern ourselves with despots, corruption, and government overreach. (“I’m from the government, and I’m here to help.”)
The progressives have a hundred-year head start and they own the schools; we have a lot of catching up to do.