No, We Haven’t Evolved Beyond Our Constitution

This past week the Constitution turned 234 years old, signed September 17, 1787. I’d like to take a look at how well it is aging.

"Scene at the Signing of the Constitution of the United States" by Howard Chandler Christy
image found on Wikipedia

Back in the day, there were some things our founders probably couldn’t have imagined: cars, subways, trains, airplanes, rockets to space, satellites, electricity, lightbulbs, radio, telephones, television, computers, cell phones, internet. I was alive for the landing on the moon. I went through college doing term papers with the footnotes at the bottom of the page—where I had to roll the paper down to the right location on the typewriter to type the note, then roll back up to type the rest of the page, and hope it all fit. If it didn’t, I’d have to type the whole page over, correcting any errors with white out (a little bottle of white paint you brushed on over the typo). When we got really advanced, we used erasable bond paper, which smeared badly, so you had to be really careful, and then you had to get a Xerox copy to turn in, because teachers didn’t like the thin texture of the paper or the smearing.

Computers were around, even when I was in high school (or before), but they were large, room-sized devices that you fed programming cards into. Personal computers came out, in rudimentary forms, shortly after college.

illustration of technological progress found here

I remember one person with a mobile phone during college. It was connected to his car and was the size of a large brick, required a large antenna, and also did not have a very clear sound. I didn’t see a need for a cell phone until we moved to Houston in 1998. I didn’t have a “smart phone” until two phones ago (phone life is longer for me than for most at 3-5 years).

So all this technology surrounding us has changed. But have humans changed?

There’s a prejudice against older generations, a feeling of self-importance current generations have, where we think those people back then were primitive—not just technologically, but in their thinking as well. I think there’s a word for it, but I can’t come up with it right now. Presentism is close, the assumption that past generations are bad for not holding the same cultural morals as are held in present culture. But that’s not quite it.

Anyway, while we may think we’re better for all our technological advances, there have been tradeoffs. We’ve mostly let go of basics, like how to sustain ourselves during a famine, or how to treat ourselves in the absence of a hospital, or how to dispose of waste. Maybe even how to make cheese. Specialization has meant letting go of general knowledge, much of which was widely known by past generations but has been lost to us. Think about something as simple as going to the bathroom, where we find easy access to toilet paper and soap and water. I’ve experienced camping, but I bring along comforts of home, plus maybe some hand sanitizer.

The point is, technology doesn’t equal human advancement. Humans are still human. Even evolutionists talk in time lengths of millions of years, not the mere handful of millennia of recorded history. Humans today are flawed in the same ways as our ancestors—but maybe with the technology to spread the harm further.

So, here’s what our founding fathers—and all wise people throughout history—knew about human nature: Humans are imperfect. Among the imperfections are:

·         Pride

·         Selfishness

·         Deceitfulness

·         Manipulation

·         Cheating

·         Greed

·         Thievery

·         Prejudice

·         Short-temperedness

·         Impatience

·         Laziness

·         Tendency toward violence

·         Lust

·         Power mongering

I haven’t covered them all, of course. But they include the problems brought up in the Ten Commandments. They include the 7 Deadly Sins. They include human weakness depicted in stories, and from life over the centuries—regardless of what technology the people may have had. Ancient Greeks and Romans faced the same human weaknesses. So did people through the Dark Ages and the Renaissance. And in Ancient Israel, Ancient China, Ancient India, or Ancient anywhere.  

portraits of Greek philosophers Sokrates, Antisthenes, Chrissipos, and Epikouros
in the British Museum

The last one on that list, power mongering, is particularly important when we’re talking about government. There’s a scripture used in my faith to warn against abuse of power:

We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion. (Doctrine & Covenants 121:39)

James Madison put it this way in Federalist No. 51,

If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government that is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.

Mark Twain said it this way, in A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court, Chapter 10, “Beginnings of Civilization”:

Unlimited power is the ideal thing when it is in safe hands. The despotism of heaven is the one absolutely perfect government. An earthly despotism would be the absolutely perfect earthly government, if the conditions were the same, namely, the despot the perfectest individual of the human race, and his lease of life perpetual. But as a perishable perfect man must die, and leave his despotism in the hands of an imperfect successor, an earthly despotism is not merely a bad form of government, it is the worst form that is possible.

Humans are flawed. Even (especially) in 2021. If you’re looking at some human evolution since 1787, you’re probably not going to find any measurable progress. At all.

People are not angels. Until they are, there needs to be limits placed on the authority anyone is granted.

The question is, then, is there any reason to think the Constitution is outdated? Insofar as it addresses ways to protect us from human flaws like lust for power, then, no; it is definitely not outdated.

The Constitution, which we’re celebrating, is an instrument for limiting government in a way intended to give individuals as much freedom as possible while limiting their ability to harm one another—which is what government is instituted to do.

The Preamble is the mission statement. As opposed to the loosely governing Articles of Confederation, which weren’t doing their necessary governing job, the Constitution was set up by “We the People of the United States”:

In Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity….

Constitution detail, image from Wikipedia

The first purpose is to get the separate states more unified, to do the things a nation needs to be able to do—things like make treaties with other nations, establish trade with other nations, keep the peace among the member states, etc.

General Welfare does not mean a national-level charity giveaway program. It means promoting what is in the best interest of the nation as a whole, rather than favoring one state or region over another.

Does every nation have to have an identical constitution to this one in order to flourish? Not necessarily. But what they would have to do is meet the principles—the ways of dividing and balancing power so that the good could be done that needs doing by a federal government, while leaving freedom to the people and the local jurisdictions.

Our three branches of government separate the lawmaking duties, the executive duties (i.e., the carrying out of the laws), and the judicial duties (i.e., the judging according to the laws). And the lawmaking duties are further divided into state representation in the upper chamber and population representation in the lower chamber, which have to deliberate and come to agreement on any laws enacted. It's not meant to be easy.

Around this time of year last year, I wrote a 4-part series on the Constitution, with an introduction and then covering the first three articles:

·       Try Reading the Constitution, Part I 

·       Part II: Article I—Legislative Branch 

·       Part III: Article II—Executive Branch 

·       Part IV: Article III—Judicial Branch 

The point here was that the Constitution is readable and understandable—no lawyer or judge needed to interpret it. And we ought to be reading it and understanding it.

It’s hard to know at this point whether We the People will be able to take corrective action so that our country will once again be governed by our basic law, the Constitution. There are so many egregious violations right now. And the laws are only good for a people that respect them and adhere to them. Otherwise we just have tyranny of the most powerful—as most of historical mankind has had to deal with.

As with the treatments available for a certain virus, treatments for our beloved Constitution on life support are denied, as though they don’t exist. We may have to start small—at our school board races, and our local government. Stop tyranny there by our constant vigilance. And then work with others to stop tyranny at every level all the way up.

We’re going to have to be better, to overcome our human flaws, so we merit the help I hope God is willing to give. I believe He’s willing to give it, because He gave the help to our founders back in 1787 to come up with this Constitution. It’s a miraculous governmental instrument that leads to freedom, prosperity, and civilization—every time good people try it.