Difference between revisions of "Civicwiki:What government"
(Changed the approach) |
(trying to shorten) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
--> | --> | ||
<!--<span style="font-size:120%;">'''The Issues'''</span>--> | <!--<span style="font-size:120%;">'''The Issues'''</span>--> | ||
| − | In the early days of this country we were an independent lot. We believed in a short list of "inalienable" rights. We saw the need for government. The problem | + | In the early days of this country we were an independent lot. We believed in a short list of "inalienable" rights. We saw the need for government. The problem was how to use it to maintain order without destroying liberty. This balance was the subject of the public debate leading up to the ratification of our constitution, articulated in essays that came down to us as The Federalist Papers and The Anti-Federalist Papers. It amounted to one side saying that the existing confederation of independent states provided all the government that could exist and be compatible with liberty; and the federalists saying that it was insufficient to maintain order and provide for a nation strong enough to defend itself against external (and internal) attacks on that liberty. Both sides agreed with Thomas Paine who wrote "government even in its best state is but a necessary evil in its worst state, an intolerable one."<ref name="Common Sense"> Thomas Paine, ''Common Sense'' (1776)</ref>. |
| + | <!-----Richard Epstein describes their dilemma thus: "A government that is too strong can become tyrannical and oppress its citizens; yet a government that is too weak cannot withstand a succession of internal upheavals or external attacks . . , with catastrophic loss of liberty and destruction of property. The key challenge was to determine how best to navigate between these two perils."<ref name="Classical Liberal Constitution"> Epstein, Richard ''The Classical Liberal Consititution'' (2014) Cambridge, Massachusetts; Harvard University Press</ref> | ||
| + | -----> | ||
| − | In the early part of the 20th century there was a reversal | + | In the early part of the 20th century there was a reversal to the progressive view that saw government not as a necessary evil, but rather as a force for good--correcting social flaws that the minimalist approach failed to address. Following Epstein's analysis <ref name="Classical Liberal Constitution"> Richard Epstein ''The Classical Liberal Consititution'' (2014) Cambridge, Massachusetts; Harvard University Press</ref> this view holds that individual rights do not exist independently of government but are created by it; and that a benevolent state, administered by impartial experts, can eliminate the economic imbalances created by our rapid industrialization and advance of technology. Those early progressives saw the constitution's limits on state power as barriers to be overcome by a greater use of government power to be exercised by administrative agencies that receive power through legislative action and that the power to decide major issues should be subject to the people through democratic vote rather than through the Constitution's structure, protection of property, and judicial review. |
Revision as of 12:57, 16 August 2015
In the early days of this country we were an independent lot. We believed in a short list of "inalienable" rights. We saw the need for government. The problem was how to use it to maintain order without destroying liberty. This balance was the subject of the public debate leading up to the ratification of our constitution, articulated in essays that came down to us as The Federalist Papers and The Anti-Federalist Papers. It amounted to one side saying that the existing confederation of independent states provided all the government that could exist and be compatible with liberty; and the federalists saying that it was insufficient to maintain order and provide for a nation strong enough to defend itself against external (and internal) attacks on that liberty. Both sides agreed with Thomas Paine who wrote "government even in its best state is but a necessary evil in its worst state, an intolerable one."[1].
In the early part of the 20th century there was a reversal to the progressive view that saw government not as a necessary evil, but rather as a force for good--correcting social flaws that the minimalist approach failed to address. Following Epstein's analysis [2] this view holds that individual rights do not exist independently of government but are created by it; and that a benevolent state, administered by impartial experts, can eliminate the economic imbalances created by our rapid industrialization and advance of technology. Those early progressives saw the constitution's limits on state power as barriers to be overcome by a greater use of government power to be exercised by administrative agencies that receive power through legislative action and that the power to decide major issues should be subject to the people through democratic vote rather than through the Constitution's structure, protection of property, and judicial review.
Today's issues are no less important to the stability and longevity of our government and the harmony of our society. The details are different - but the issues are still about how a diverse people live under one government and reconcile their philosophical differences. Their importance is heightened because we now seem deeply divided. Politicians and factions play to our differences and divide us by misinforming us to get elected. It is a cynical play for political power at the expense of the health of our society. Therefore:
- CW is about
- the issues that most concern Americans today.
- (see: The Issues)
- and about providing
- informed citizens and a forum for objective information, better understanding, less divisiveness, and thus,
- the political momentum that is needed to govern effectively.
- (see: Just the facts)
