LET FREEDOM RING con't. next column LET FREEDOM RING con't. next column
LET FREEDOM RING con't. p. 24
LET FREEDOM RING continued
LET FREEDOM RING continued
CIVICS AND
SELF-AGGRANDIZEMENT
by Wesley May
PROLOGUE
Definition of self-aggrandizement by
Merriam-Webster: “acting or intended to
enhance one’s power, wealth, position, or
reputation; especially: boastful often in
disregard of the truth.”
Back in my public-school and liberal-arts
college days, a word that I encountered frequently
in my studies was SELF-AGGRANDIZEMENT.
But I don’t remember the last time I even heard
that word … although it still is so alive and well
(well? actually no - SICK) … because every time
you surrender to the FAKE NEWS, you are being
attacked by Self-Aggrandizement.
To set the stage for a valid discussion
of “Civics,” including the specter of Self-
Aggrandizement, let me go back to our
Founding Fathers and the Founding Documents
they created: Thomas Jefferson (Declaration
of Independence) and James Madison (US
Constitution). These were the primary sources
for the human definition of a “NEW PATH” for
restructuring governments, which was later
immortalized in Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address:
as “…this nation, under God, shall have a new
birth of freedom—and that government of the
people, by the people, for the people, shall not
perish from the earth.”
The bridge between our country as it existed
during Revolutionary and Civil War periods and
today is provided, by the transcendental codicil
added by John Adams: “Our Constitution was
made only for a moral and religious people. It
is wholly inadequate to the government of any
other.”
Our two founding documents are the true
fountainhead of American Exceptionalism
because they guarantee to our citizens the
protection of “unalienable Rights endowed
by their Creator” (i.e., specifically NOT THE
GOVERNMENT) within a political framework
based on “consent of the governed” and
“separation of powers” constrained by a system
of “checks and balances”! Concerning the John
Adams codicil, how does one gauge the nature
of morality? The necessary guidance is provided
by Jesus’ Great Commandment
to His disciples: “So in everything,
do to others what you would have
them do to you, for this sums up
the Law and the Prophets.” And It
must be absolutely clear that Adams
effectively elevated his stipulation
to be the most inviolate condition
upon which everything else in our
Founding Documents rests!
If you want a wonderful
indoctrination into these founding
documents and to the thoughts
of Jefferson and Adams, then I
highly recommend the John Locke
Foundation’s “Living History Event,”
a “John Adams-Thomas Jefferson
Debate” that has a one-night
stand in Raleigh every November
(most recently on November 5 this
year). Just Google the John Locke
Foundation for more info!
DISCUSSION
It should be no surprise that
societal dynamics can generate an
ebb and flow in societal trends. Such
has been the case. But unfortunately,
especially during recent years, John Adam’s
moral imperative has been ignored too often,
distorting the actual effects that should have
been achieved. However, the straightforward
clarity of the Biblical corrective source actually
confirms the best hope for finding the way back
is to reassert the EXCEPTIONALISM envisaged
by our Founding Fathers and to bury the SELFAGGRANDIZEMENT
that underlies much of our
current problems!
If we perceptibly consider that Civics no
longer seems so relevant, then the way back is to
return to the mindset of our Founding Fathers…
i.e., pay more attention to fundamental morality
rather than toying with transitory fads which will
actually undermine the political system that our
Founding Fathers bequeathed to us. To clarify,
I consider Antifa to be a morally contradictory
example of such a destructive “fad.”
To explain the genesis of this opinion, I’ll
summarize the effect on me while studying
“classical” Civics, which was one of my favorite
courses in public schools prior to college.
After high school, that emphasis was actually
strengthened by liberal arts study in the 1950’s…
not in Civics, per se, but in Humanities at
Columbia, in New York City, followed later by
foreign studies in Madrid and Rome. Studies
were based on: Greek philosophers (especially
Plato and Aristotle) + European authors
(Aquinas, Locke. Rousseau, Marx and Engles,
etc.) + composers of classical music: symphonic
(Beethoven) + opera (Verdi/Puccini), and art
(especially the Spanish masters in Madrid) etc.
There is definitely a very strong and positive
linkage between the multiple disciplines of
the Humanities and Civics. This elevates the
Humanities from being just a casual influence
on Civics, as some believe, to being the window
through which moral considerations, as
mandated by John Adams, can be effectively
integrated into the fabric of Civics. The results
on our system are that government’s structure
and procedures are specifically designed to
satisfy the transcendental requirement to
be completely in consonance with what is
mandatory to deliver the moral benefits that
have been promised to us in our Founding
Documents. This is the classic fulfillment of
the legal term, Sine qua non, which means
that without the indispensable prerequisite,
MORALITY, the promised, enumerated rights
cannot exist. So this is a very delicate balance,
and recent history shows how quickly that
balance can be corrupted which then may
effectively abrogate the rights promised in our
Founding Documents!
Former Supreme Court Associate Justice
Sandra Day O’Connor has rightly affirmed the
following in answer to the questions: Why Civics
and Why Now? “The only reason we have public
school education in America is because in the
early days of the country, our leaders thought
we had to teach our young generation about
citizenship...that obligation never ends. If we
don’t take every generation of young people
and make sure they understand that they are an
essential part of government, we won’t survive.
We don’t teach our own kids. It’s insane.”
Nevertheless, over many decades, a “Civic
lethargy” spread through local governments,
thereby undermining the overall vitality of the
role of Civics. The inevitable consequence was
that the moral dimension (remember the John
Adam’s codicil) was not properly integrated into
the fabric of Civics.
Furthermore, there
is even resistance to
teaching Civics: 25 percent
of teachers surveyed by
the Center for Information
& Research on Civic
Learning and Engagement
believed parents would
object to including
political considerations
into government or
civics classes, and only
38 percent thought their
district would give them
strong support. Both
statistics are evidence of
actual barriers blocking
the most promising
practices in civics
education.
Although this trend
line may be questionable,
it does not have to be
predictive. I believe so
strongly that the vision of
our Founders, although
somewhat tarnished by
wear, remains so attractive and has endured in
theory for so long that the current proponents
of classical Civics (like those following Justice
O’Connor’s lead) will successfully regain the
access to influence government structure and
activity, the core of the Civics curriculum!
Here is a very brief summary of my
comprehension of the decay dynamics.
Remember that up to the 1960’s (i.e. after I
No. 133 The Pinehurst Gazette, Inc. p.27
/event
