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, do ordain and establish this
Constitution for the United States of America.
In September 1787, five republican oligarchs (the Constitutional Convention’s Committee of Style) wrote the citizens’ proposition for responsibility, which individuals are free to reject, perhaps at personal risk if a U.S. citizen.
I am happy to discover The Interactive Constitution, launched in 2015, to create a platform for debate by paired members of two groups: one who seems to support a democratic form of government and another who seems to favor republicanism under their rule of law. So far, I have not discovered comparably extensive opinion[1] about the U.S. Preamble from such esteemed scholars. For examples, see extensive comment on Rappaport’s essay.[2] Many online sources obfuscate the U.S. Preamble’s civic, civil, and legal powers.[3], [4] Some “authorities” make controversial if not fallacious statements, such as “Courts will not interpret the Preamble to confer any rights or powers not granted specifically in the Constitution.”[5] Courts cannot deny that the U.S. Preamble legally ended the Confederation of States (then free and independent) and established the USA as a Union of states and a global nation as of June 21, 1788. Most scholars don’t consider mutual connection by living people to be more important than imposed connections to the past.[6], [7] For example, the First Congress, against the U.S. Preamble’s proposition, tyrannized America with “freedom of religion” when what people need is freedom to develop integrity. Politics, the art of possibilities, overthrew the 1787 constitutional separation of state from church with the Bill of Rights of 1791. The tyranny of church-state partnership can and must be reversed. Some scholars egregiously discount the U.S. Preamble by claiming that the U.S. Constitution merely fulfills the 1774 Declaration of Independence from England.[8] I’ve only touched the tip of false politics, shocking as actual reality (not my opinion) may be to most fellow citizens.
Below, I comment on The Interactive Constitution opinions about the U.S. Preamble, after expressing earned opinions in my seventh year of presenting concerns to fellow citizens at public library meetings. Don’t forget: I do not know the-literal-truth. I LISTEN to participants’ improvements/objections regarding my concerns then report the results of the meeting to them and to the library director. The work is recorded on the blog promotethepreamble.blogspot.com with essays posted starting on February 9, 2014. Early essays are not as developed as later essays. Gradually, I update them. I want you to read my writing so as to consider the U.S. Preamble’s proposition to citizens.
About the U.S. Preamble for my way of living
First, living citizens are obligated to themselves to consider, communicate, collaborate, and connect, in appreciation for fellow citizenship under acceptance of the U.S. Preamble. Failure to do so, by default, separates the individual from the entity We the People of the United States. Opposition to the U.S. Preamble’s civic proposition constitutes dissidence. Allegiance-to an institution that competes with We the People of the United States constitutes alienation. For example, attempts to civically, civilly, or legally impose spiritual practice on We the People of the United States is either dissidence or alienation, depending on the potential to reform.
The phrase in the U.S. Preamble that invokes current citizens’ political responsibility is “ourselves and our Posterity,” where both the recent generation’s “Posterity” and “ourselves” is we living fellow citizens---civic citizens and dissidents with potential to reform, excluding aliens and traitors. Thus, the men who wrote the U.S. Preamble, to whom we are their “Posterity,” are owed nothing beyond the U.S. Preamble, the amendable articles that follow, and historical errors we may prevent. For example, we should avoid political constructs or powers that support slavery or other irresponsibility. The U.S. Preamble does not effect irresponsibility.
Second, the U.S. Preamble does not propose a utopia with everyone observing the law. The action that segments the totalitarian We the People of the United States is “in order to” (accomplish the U.S. Preamble’s proposition). Only civic citizens---those who voluntarily interpret and practice the U.S. Preamble’s disciplines---are among the entity We the People of the United States, and others are dissidents, aliens, and traitors. The entity, “we, the people” is a distraction, because it does not motivate civic connection using the U.S. Preamble’s proposition.
We living fellow citizens hold each other and local, state, and federal governments accountable to the discipline of law. The principle thought and power in the U.S. Preamble is “We the People of the United States . . . ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” Under the efficient practice of the U.S. Constitution, irresponsible citizens are held accountable whether they accept the rule of law or not. When most citizens do not take seriously their individual duty to the U.S. Preamble, dissidents, aliens, and traitors can seize office and effect tyranny without constraint. Fellow citizens who suspect unjust law yet observe the law while urging reform are civic citizens rather than dissidents. Errant fellow citizens who develop the civic integrity to reform are encouraged.
Third, the articles that follow the U.S. Preamble specify “a Republican Form of Government.” Many specifications and institutions prevent democracy in complicated ways including strategic distribution of power between the people, the states, Congress, the federal administration, and the courts; the Electoral College for presidential and vice-presidential elections; legislative powers by a split Congress; election to the Senate limited to 2 per state and to the House of Representatives in proportion to the state’s population; and nomination of federal justices by the President with approval by the Senate. We the People of the United States may vote but is hindered from using democracy to defeat the rule of law or discourage development of statutory justice.
Unfortunately, Amendment I by the First Congress in an unwanted Bill of Rights granted unconstrained power to the press. Without a responsible press, We the People of the United States cannot efficiently hold governmental authorities accountable, and the U.S. Preamble’s ultimate goal, responsible human liberty, cannot be efficiently pursued.
Fourth, the goals of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition include 5 public disciplines and one human opportunity. Integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity empower responsible living citizens to practice human liberty. Not every citizen accepts responsible human liberty. The abstract 52-word preamble must be interpreted by the individual among “ourselves” so that the responsible citizen may both order his or her civic life and pursue any spiritual hopes he or she may want. The ordered life conforms to the-objective-truth if not the-literal-truth rather than human doctrine. Some citizens, either by intent or by neglect, are dissidents to responsible human
Fifth, some fellow citizens erroneously call my writing condescending: I claim I do not know what I do not know. Some call my writing sanctimonious: I perceive individual humility before whatever-God-is.
Some readers ridicule my ideas and thus my civic hopes, inspiration, and motivation; however, ridicule fails, because I am developing control of my person. I write for myself as a fellow citizen, but not in other individuals’ language or political identity: I do not know their hopes and would not influence them toward anything but responsible human
None of deceased thinkers have the benefit of the Internet and fellow citizens’ ability to discover facts therein. The Internet includes the discovery humankind has accomplished since the deaths of dead thinkers, none of whom can vote when we vote. Many thinkers left egregious error. It is not my opinion that annoys people: The U.S. Preamble’s proposition for individual happiness with civic integrity is difficult to accept. It has been falsely repressed as “secular” by political regimes who are so weak as to attempt to control human beings by fear, coercion, and force rather than encouragement to responsible human independence
Comments on Interactive Constitution essays on the U.S. Preamble
Scholars earn personal opinion which may be appreciated. I appreciate scholarship. Therefore, I want to indirectly comment on two essays by adding to “a civic glossary,” which aims to discover political terms that are general rather than proprietary. Often, scholars use proprietary phrases to bemuse We the People of the United States, intentionally or not, and we work to establish a civic glossary. In this glossary, quotation marks refer to the Interactive Constitution Essays.[9]
Acceptance is the civic citizen’s voluntary attitude toward the U.S. Preamble’s proposition. Accepting differs from “adopting” in that the civic citizen establishes and develops responsible human liberty without attempting to yield individual human authority. If the civic citizen perceives cause to revise the articles of the U.S. Constitution in order to practice and promote the U.S. Preamble’s proposition, he or she may work to make a constitutional convention happen. Elected and appointed government officials who do not appreciate the U.S. Preamble’s civic, civil, and legal powers have not achieved acceptance of the U.S. Preamble; an active entity We the People of the United States can hold government officials accountable to the U.S. Preamble. Nothing in the U.S. Preamble authorizes the U.S. Supreme Court to lessen the entity We the People of the United States or deem justices above We the People of the United States.
The Bible: no scripture or religious doctrine usurps the U.S. Preamble’s proposition. Whatever-God-is may be judgmental or vengeful when fellow citizens pit their personal Gods against each other.
The Committee of Style received a draft preamble that had no proposition for public discipline and did not feature the legal termination of the 1774 Confederation of States. Five delegates seem to have captured the essence of the convention of 55 delegates. Only 39 delegates signed the document, leaving 16 delegates dissident to the 1787 U.S. Constitution. The Committee of Style articulated in abstract phrases the creation of a government based on public discipline of by and for living citizens so as to encourage responsible human liberty both individually and collectively. The fact that no journalist has so interpreted the U.S. Preamble as a proposition for civic discipline does not negate the interpretation. So far, no majority of living citizens has accepted the U.S. Preamble’s proposition, and we work to change that.
Discipline is the intention of the 5 public institutions proposed in the U.S. Preamble (in order to encourage responsible human liberty to living citizens). The U.S. Preamble proposes public discipline rather than either “a charter government,” or “self-governance,” or “consent of the people,” or “democracy,” or speculation about whatever-God-is. “This constitution” has provisions for amendment by We the People of the United States---the “our Posterity” to the Constitution’s signers. By amendment of unjust laws and institutions We the People of the United States pursues statutory justice. The 5 disciplines are both individual citizens’ and collective citizens’ civic, civil, and legal duties more than “aspirations” such as spirituality or political correctness.
Equality as a human being is inconsistent with the uniqueness of each viable ovum. The individuality is not lessened by insemination, gestation, or rearing. Every viable ovum is due human dignity and appreciation. In civic equity the human infant develops the comprehension, understanding, and intentions to accept being human before chronological adulthood arrives. In the USA, civic citizens commit to equity in developing statutory justice, as proposed in the U.S. Preamble. The core value stated in the U.S. Preamble is public discipline so as to encourage responsible human liberty to living citizens. Human responsibility values the-objective-truth if not the-literal-truth.
Fairness is no substitute for statutory justice. We the People of the United States continually improve judicial procedures so as to pursue the-objective-truth if the-literal-truth has not been discovered. “Due process” continually approaches the-literal-truth.
Global status: Nine states ratified the U.S. Preamble along with the U.S. Constitution’s Articles by June 21, 1788, establishing the USA as one global nation with 4 neighboring free and independent global states. Virginia and New York joined the USA before operations began with 11 states on March 4, 1789. Three more states had joined before Congress ratified the unfortunate Bill of Rights on December 15, 1791. It was possible for Congress to unconstitutionally impose “freedom of religion” rather than freedom to pursue integrity, but it was not possible for them to restore the Confederation of States.
Human right: The five disciplines the U.S. Preamble proposes does not include human rights. Responsible human liberty is an acceptance rather than a right. Perhaps the Committee of Style inferred that the opportunity to develop responsible liberty (civic integrity) is the only defensible human right. “Personal liberty” is valid if and only if the individual practices responsible human liberty as a duty to self rather than to the state. The civic citizen accepts ordered liberty that conforms to the-literal-truth.
Magna Carta: No English tradition usurps the power of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition. The American Bar Association may expect future reform as the entity We the People of the United States begins to accept responsible human liberty.
National government: the national government has no authority to usurp the civic, civil, and legal powers of We the People of the United States, that entity that is defined by the U.S. Preamble. Officials of any government agency under the U.S. Constitution are either of We the People of the United States or are dissidents, aliens, or traitors. It is insufficient to say “we are first Americans” or we answer to “we, the people.”
Responsible human independence
Proposition: Birth-in or immigration-to the USA establishes fellow citizenship whether the individual accepts the U.S. Preamble or not. It’s similar to the liability of not knowing the speed limit. Trust-in and commitment-to the U.S. Preamble’s proposition constitutes membership in the entity We the People of the United States. That is, only citizens who are committed to responsible human liberty hold government officials accountable to the U.S. Constitution. Thereby, the commitment to republican rule of written law prevents a democratic form of government.
Ourselves: In the continuum of “ourselves and our Posterity” since 1787, living families and individuals are the “ourselves” and their descendants and beyond are the “our Posterity.” Thus, living citizens at any time have the duty to hold local, state, and national government officials accountable to the U.S. Preamble’s proposition. Civic integrity in the minds of the framing generation has meaning to current voters only to the extent of knowing to avoid past errors. Some statutory justice that has been codified in the past 230 years corrected errors.
“Substantive power”: powers granted in the body of the U.S. Constitution must conform to the U.S. Preamble’s disciplines in order to encourage responsible human liberty. If not, Constitutional amendment is needed. Erroneous opinion by the U.S. Supreme Court is destined for amendment or reversal.
We the People of the United States as defined in the U.S. Preamble voluntarily hold themselves and local, state, and national governments accountable to the public disciplines. Dissidents to the U.S. Preamble risk subjugation to written law. “We, the people” expresses privation rather than totalitarianism. Only citizens who are members of We the People of the United States are sovereign. Others are weakened by their negligence if not their intentions.
Written constitution: republicanism under the rule of law is not possible without written law, and statutory justice cannot be pursued without the power to amend legislation. England, with a mixed constitution, cannot possibly grasp the importance of the U.S. Preamble, which empowers responsible human liberty rather than imposes tradition.
Conclusion
The reader may be overwhelmed by the issues I present regarding individual interpretation of the U.S. Preamble. My quest to understand it has been a slow development in my lifetime.
I write neither to ask anyone to follow or trace my journey, nor to question anyone’s citizenship, but to encourage every fellow citizen to consider, communicate, collaborate, and connect with each other to promote and enrich personal interpretations of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition for living in the USA. It is critical to comprehend the "ourselves and our Posterity."
The ultimate standard for responsible human liberty will never be known if fellow citizens are not pursuing the practice and articulating individual discoveries.
Copyright©2020 by Phillip R. Beaver. All rights reserved. Permission is hereby granted for the publication of all or portions of this paper as long as this complete copyright notice is included. Updated on 5/29/20 to replace "liberty," which is often taken as license to harm, with "independence." I may have missed some.
[2]
Mike Rappaport, “The Relevance of the Preamble to Constitutional
Interpretation,” March 1, 2019, Law & Liberty Blog, https://www.lawliberty.org/2019/03/01/the-relevance-of-the-preamble-to-constitutional-interpretation/.
[4]
Online at https://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/educational-resources/about-educational-outreach/activity-resources/us.
[9]
Online
at https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/preamble-ic/interps/37#giving-meaning-to-the-preamble-by-erwin-chemerinskyi
and at https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/interpretation/preamble-ic/interps/37.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I want your opinion and intend to respond.