I do agree that it could not have been written at any other time. I also agree with RMP about the Constitutional Convention. It's sad to think we have a President that would veto the Bill of Rights if he had the chance.

I second that. A Constitutional Convention today? We may as well just burn the original, along with The Declaration, Bill of Rights...

Sorry I can't help with the quote, but I can agree that that is what she said, as I remember it also.

Primarily, the Enlightenment philosophy, which soon after declined. And then, the geographical remoteness of the Colonial Revolutionaries from Britain itself gave them enough of an equalizer that would not exist today.

And I so agree with your final point: We have it, we earned it, and we can't let it go without fighting the way The Founders did.

Reading "The 5,000 Year Leap" gives an interesting history of the concepts and philosophical base which influenced the writers of the Constitution, with sidelights not commonly taught in most schools. Most history focuses on the English evolution of concepts of liberty, with some mention of earlier attempts at democratic or republic forms of government (usually Greek or Roman). What you rarely see is the interesting paths Franklin's mind took, investigating Saxon common law and governance, as well as a look at how Native American tribal councils resolved differences.

I visited Jefferson's house in Virginia earlier this year. It was very interesting, and worthwhile for everyone to see. The feeling one gets is that the english settlers wanted to be free of the ENGLISH and THEIR religion. They wrote the part about freedom of religion, but what they meant was freedom from the king's religion. When it came to the Mormons, they were persecuted because their religion was different from the settlers. When it came to individual rights, the settlers wanted to be free, but when it came to the the individual rights of the indians- thats different. The individual rights of the slaves? Well, Jefferson had hundreds of them on his plantation. Individual rights of mexicans? Well, we can get to that after we capture all the land from Atlantic to Pacific oceans. The point that I got is that the constitution wasnt some sore of philosophical document- it was a series of compromises that enough people could agree on and sign. But the history of the USA isnt very clean. We say one thing and do quite another, from the start right up to today. The problem is that there was no real basis for the constitution like there would have been had Ayn Rand written it without all those compromises that were included in it.

Hello richrobinson,
A great thread. Some very good comments. If you or others are interested in how the founding fathers worked out their differences and have not yet read the Constitutional Convention Debates, I would highly recommend doing so. There were many serious disagreements and conflicts. Often the debates would become quite heated. Franklin, being the elder statesman, would often sit quietly listening and then offer a suggestion that would give rise to compromise. I would highly recommend reading the Signet Classic, The Anti-Federalist Papers and the Constitutional Convention Debates, ISBN 978-0-451-52884-1. If the Constitution was written today it would end up a disaster. Today's politician's are not the statesmen our founders were. I believe it was Thomas Jefferson, though away in France at the time but in contact by letter with Adams that called the assembly a group of "Demigods."
Regards,
O.A.

That's great to hear, Snoo, both about your daughter, and your personal experience in your own public school.

It occurs to me that we are so often inundated by the media with "groups vs. groups" issues, that even as Individualists we can forget the importance of an individual teacher, boss or whoever in our lives.

Your post served to remind me that even as I speak of attending this school or that school, and how great is was, it was always an individual teacher in this subject or that who truly inspired me, not the institution itself. And more than once, the exact opposite type of teacher that I somehow knew to ignore.

It was taught at my kids' school during Constitution week, even at a government school no less.

That same day I tried to explain what it was to her. I don't know if any of it stuck, but perhaps it is good to mark on your calendar that week to have a discussion with your kids about it to fill in the blanks. If they are older, they can watch the Hillsdale lectures.. they are free. I'm an atheist, so maybe instead of bible reading time, we can have constitution reading time.. is that weird?

In a follow up to my immediately preceding post, I would also be curious at to if and what your daughter may have asked you in the way of questions, and also if you could tell if The Constitution was brought up in a positive way. (I don't even want to think about it as possible, but if it was brought up in a negative way to Kindergartners, then my Spidey Sense for that school district would be on full alert.

[Minor edits to missing content]

there is a book "SUMMER OF 1776" which details the writing of the constitution. Very interesting, I strongly recommend it.

What should be recognized first and foremost is that the Constitution was the second attempt at a government framework preceded by the first failed attempt known as the Articles of Confederation. What I find most instructive is that the same men who put together the Articles of Confederation didn't get it right the first time, but were willing to admit it, scrap everything, and start over. They also were willing to spend the time debating and wrangling not over _who_ was right, but _what_ was right - despite the presence of legendary figures and big egos. The most outstanding quality of the gentlemen involved was their willingness to suborn their own pride and stubbornness and concentrate on a solution that addressed the obvious flaws of every other government in the history of man to that point.

Having read the excerpts of the notes from the Constitutional Convention, it amazes me the depth of knowledge these men had of governmental theory - real political science - and the history of government: what worked and what didn't. They didn't allow fads determine policy or lead them about by the nose, they vigorously debated alternatives of each and every step and how it would tie in with the greater whole, and they expressly forbade a rush to just get anything done. There was no "well you have to pass it so we can see what's in it." These men knew that after they signed it, they would have to take it to their respective state legislatures and get them to sign on. They advocated the positions of their states, while recognizing the supremacy of the envisioned nation as a whole.

I think every American would be better off in many ways to spend an entire class on the Constitution of the United States, how it was written, and covering each and every provision of it. We would not only have a more informed society, but one which I hope would be less susceptible to the lies and usurpations of the politicians.

It was taught with reference from a chapter of a book called "American History" by an elementary school teacher when I was a juvenile dino back in the 50s.
Another grade daily taught an hour or so of "World History."
Heck, another grade even taught "Alabama History."
Whoa! Memory rush! We even had to sing the Alabama State Song.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tn5zHyn3...

I have not heard that for years and years and years!

At first, my reaction was going to be: "Whoa, that's a little young to bring up The Constitution". Then I immediately changed my mind, the caveat being, as Rich said, was it brought up in a positive way?

If so, then kudos to the school.

Once again I will return to my Catholic roots, and while I now know, and would never support, the "fire and brimstone, this is a sin, you're going to Hell" approach, and moreover, constant inculcation of guilt, guilt, guilt...behind all the misguided application and irrationality, was a proper desire to teach right from wrong at an early age. And I remember "getting it" to the degree that a 6 year old could, which I would not underestimate.

I know her teacher pretty well and I get the impression she would speak highly of the constitution, she is an older teacher, so usually they do a better job. My daughter didn't say much, but she at least mentioned something about rights. They also have a large framed copy of the constitution in the library. I grew up not far from where we are now and as a 4th grader in the 1990's we had to memorize the preamble and we were tested on the amendments and discussed the federalist/anti-federalist papers. The same history teacher also bet that I couldn't read "Roots" in its entirety. I did, gave, and oral summary of the entire thing and he was pissed he lost the bet for the first year in all his years of teaching. I guess I was fortunate I was in a good public school, even in a liberal state.

You just articulated my argument against a Constitutional Convention. +1.

The foundong fathers were all subjects of the British Crown. Their ancestors had gotten to the Americas primarily to escape religious persecution and to lessen the Crown's oppressive authority by time and distance.

The fight for individual rights had begun in England with the Charter of Liberties in 1100, and continued through the Magna Charta 1215, Petition of Rights 1628, the English Bill of Rights 1689, and the philosophy of John Locke in the early 1700's. Seen in this light, the U.S. Constitution was the culmination of a 700-year intellectual war successfully waged.

Their common knowledge of this history and agreement with its precepts explains how it got written.

Did she ask any more questions? I'm wondering if the teachers spoke of it in a positive way.

Hello richrobinson,
I believe it was Ayn Rand that wrote/said (though I haven't been able to find it again to verify) that the Constitution of the United States could not have been written at any other time in history. Never prior to nor since then have all the conditions been right to accomplish what the founders did. The opportunity, the geography, but most importantly the philosophy. And that is what doesn't exist now, at least not in great enough numbers.

I was hoping that someone on here would recognize it and/or help me find it so I can quote it properly. It seems to apply to so many posts on this site in many different ways. To apply it here is to say that you are absolutely correct. We must defend the Constitution. We must save it now because we surely would not get it re-written correctly now.

Hillsdale college has free online lectures about the creation of the constitution and a discussion on the federalist and anti-federalist papers. It is quite good as it gives the full historical context.

Yes, my daughter started kindergarten this year and they did discuss the constitution that week. She came home and asked me if I knew what it was and when I said yes she was shocked!

Excellent point. All the more reason to regain control of the education system.

That a good phrase, and the way I remember it: "a fairly good understanding of the basics of civics.", starting from our city, county, State and up to the Federal level. What is more important to teach in school, besides the three R's?

My guess is your average kid today, even ones from a "good" school, don't have a clue how government works.

That's the same time frame that I was in the Clutches of the good nuns. By the 4th grade, we had memorized the preamble of the Constitution and (God alone knows why!) the opening paragraphs of the Legend of Sleepy Hollow. By the 6th grade, we had a fairly good understanding of the basics of civics.

http://www2.ed.gov/policy/fund/guid/cons...
"Has this ever been done in your child's school?"
I put it on my calendar so next school-year I can ask my kids' school if they're doing something for this.