WE THE PEOPLE

These days, politics takes up a lot of our time, especially those of us on social media. We argue with those who disparage the political  party we support, scream at our computer screens and televisions when we see a member of the opposition spinning news events, and exhaust ourselves ferreting out real news from “fake” news.

There is a division in American society, which has only two viable political parties, the left and the right, the quintessential either/or philosophical fallacy. Lines are drawn. Dogma becomes amour that facts cannot breach on either side.

America, the land of the free and the home of the brave, seems to be slipping into the land of the freaks and the home of the knave. Presidential press conferences look more like episodes from Jerry Springer. And the gravitas, so hard won by America in decades past, appears to be diminishing.

It is painful to witness.

It should anger us, regardless of our politics, for this is an assault on the essence of that which binds us each to another under one flag.

Can there be a remedy? Or are we too entrenched in our ideologies that descent into the madness of another civil war is inevitable?

Perhaps there is salvation.

It comes as a phrase written by men from the Age of Enlightenment, that magnificent era in the eighteenth century when scientific inquiry, intelligence, and an ambition to aspire to become the best versions of ourselves, were considered virtues.

Despite glaring and blatant inequities, the outright horrors of slavery and genocide, there were men, themselves flawed, greedy, and perhaps barbarous, who sought a better world. And even though they were blind to their own faults, they nevertheless acted to create a  world of their making free from tyranny.

The phrase begins, “We, the people…”

Three simple words strung together to forge a fearsome and awesome weapon, devastating to monarchies and dictators. A phrase that strikes fear into the hearts of tyrants, emperors, and despots.  We, the people.

This declaration of identity, implying as it does the strength of numbers, stands in defiance of the ruling class. It sounds the death knell for the divine right of kings. It undermines the iron fist of totalitarianism, and though those specific words may not be employed everywhere in the world, the sentiment for which they stand always brings about regime change. We the people.

When democracy was birthed in ancient Athens, a problem became apparent to the intelligentsia. The problem was that the have-nots will want to wrest the wealth from the haves.

Aristotle was consulted. His solution was elegant. Reduce the disparity between the haves and the have-nots and then all can participate in society (with the exception of slaves and women of course, those were the times in which Aristotle lived after all).

Adam Smith in 1776, wrote his book, Wealth of Nations, for which he is looked upon as the father of modern capitalism, and saw the very same problem. The solution however, was to be quite different. Instead of reducing disparity, it was decided democracy was to be reduced for the have-nots. America adopted this system.

Wealth, power and privilege has now been concentrated in one per cent, some say less, of the population, leaving the other ninety-nine per cent in varying degrees of membership in the have-nots.

We the people, are the majority. If we would but unite, we could improve our lot and perhaps get closer to the lofty democratic ideals of ancient Athens.

We, the pronoun that states unequivocally there is more than one, is the core strength of any movement wishing to stand against oppression, to face down authoritarianism, to defeat fascism, and work for the greater good.

But it will be up to us to determine who exactly are “the people.”

The plurality of persons constitutes the people, which is usually determined by ethnicity or familial bonds in most cultures. That is a fact problematic in modern societies like America. Ideas can bind. Beliefs can bind. But there are so many variations on those themes that the competing ideas/beliefs themselves become a barrier to cohesiveness.

Surely simple human values can bind us in shared humanity. We all love our spouses, our children, our grandchildren, and our extended family of cousins, aunts and uncles. This might serve as a small first step toward empathy for others, a place from which to start.

Beyond that, most of us would not wish to see people suffer, or die, or be unjustly punished, or oppressed, or denied a chance to reach their potential. Is this not something we can agree upon? Could this not be a small second step?

Agreed, this a more difficult problem, many in our society do not look like we do, we are after all a multicultural, diversified amalgamation of immigrants from all over the world. At least this is so in the major cities.

Familiarity could solve this dilemma. If there were outreach programs, places to meet others from different ethnic backgrounds, where food, drink, books, music, customs and ideas could be shared safely, we would learn to trust each other and to realize there are no races but one, the human race.

And race is not even a biological term. There really is no such thing as race per se, there is only one species of humans, Homo sapiens.

There will always be extreme views, violent people and mentally ill folks willing to do us harm. They are the few. They always will be the minority.

There are more of us who do not do such things. If we band together, if we realize the good in providing care for these types of folks we can minimize the effect they have on our society. Minimizing the effect will be good for us all. Helping others will be good for us all.

Realizing that most of us want the same things, love, food, shelter, liberty and the chance of happiness as defined by ourselves is a step toward binding us together under one flag no matter from whence we came to this land.

Acknowledging the important parts of our lives, the wish for peace, love, to be able to put food on the table, a roof over our heads, to hear our babies laugh, to see our children grow, to care for our sick and educate ourselves as well as our young, these are the important issues, and they should serve to bind us together.

And if we can agree upon these basic principles, these common values, it could be a start to make things right.

There will always be room for individual expression and freedoms under the security of the group. But with those freedoms comes a responsibility that we collectively look after each other and that includes those who come to our shores seeking a new life, just as the majority of our families did, some a longer time ago than others, and some whose ancestors had no choice in the matter. And that is not to forget there were those who were already here.

We, a pronoun indicating more than the one. The people, a greater number of persons.

 All of us with different customs and traditions, living under one flag that binds us together with purpose to make a better life for our children, and with roo
m enough for free expression.

We the people can force the leaders of the country whether we chose them or not, to do what is right on the important things that matter to us all and not what matters to the economic bottom line of corporations and power brokers.

We the people.