Why Democracy is Difficult


syrakusos

Recommended Posts

If you run the Declaration of Independence through a grammar and style checker, you will find that it takes a modern college education to understand. I would argue that most of today’s graduates do not understand it, but perhaps that is only from the lack of trying.

FIRST TWO PARAGRAPHS

Readability Consensus
Grade Level: 19
Reading Level: difficult to read.
Reader's Age: College graduate
LONG TRAIN OF ABUSES
Readability Consensus
Grade Level: 23
Reading Level: very difficult to read.
Reader's Age: College graduate
LAST THREE PARAGRAPHS
Readability Consensus
Grade Level: 16
Reading Level: difficult to read.
Reader's Age: College graduate
Complete essay on my blog here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd suggest that it is not a lack of education that is the obstacle to understanding the Declaration of Independence... but rather a lack of values.

The D of I was written for decent people.

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you run the Declaration of Independence through a grammar and style checker, you will find that it takes a modern college education to understand. I would argue that most of today’s graduates do not understand it, but perhaps that is only from the lack of trying.

FIRST TWO PARAGRAPHS

Readability Consensus
Grade Level: 19
Reading Level: difficult to read.
Reader's Age: College graduate
LONG TRAIN OF ABUSES
Readability Consensus
Grade Level: 23
Reading Level: very difficult to read.
Reader's Age: College graduate
LAST THREE PARAGRAPHS
Readability Consensus
Grade Level: 16
Reading Level: difficult to read.
Reader's Age: College graduate
Complete essay on my blog here.

Gee. They didn't have a "modern college education" back then. What did they do? What did they do?

--Brant

if you can't read and understand the DofC by the 8th grade from a modern transcript and spellings, your "education" was a cheat--off a copy of the original document the main problem is mechanically following the long lines of text

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gee. They didn't have a "modern college education" back then. What did they do? What did they do?

They read the Bible... and lived by it.

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people”.

It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

– John Adams

The American Constitutional form of government DOESN'T WORK for immoral people with rotten values.

The ONLY way to make it work for them is to VIOLATE IT.

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Greg and Brandt, the real horror of George Orwell's 1984 was not just the destruction of Winston Smith and Julia - though there was that - but the destruction of the English language. Pithy aphorisms and snappy zingers have their place in communication, and that is why those short replies need to be kept in their place. My point is that the problem is more complicated.

If people were "moral" back then for supporting the Constitution, what does that say about the one-third who remained Tories, or the one-third who were ambivalent, or the ones who wrote the Articles? What about the Alien Acts and the Sedition Acts which violated the basic rights to freedom of speech and press? Did the nation collapse into immorality in eight years … and never recover…? Considering the disparity in their views of government, were Federalists or Republicans more or less moral or more or less immoral? You can find several anthologies of "anti-Federalist papers", arguments against the Constitution. Were those people moral degenerates? Your sweeping statements and glib generalities do not help with the analysis.

Thanksgiving weekend 2008, I read volume one of Marx's Capital. I did not read every word. I did read about the first quarter or third, and then moved forward page by page. I stopped occasionally for passages that interested me or that seemed especially relevant to his thesis. It took me about eight hours altogether. I doubt that any of my Marxist comrades in my sociology classes ever did that. But one time, in a graduate criminology class, I said to one of the most favored students in the curriculum, opening to make a different point, "Look, you've read The Communist Manifesto…" She interjected, "Most of it." So, the problem really comes back to will, not ability.

I point out that the King James Version is just The Bible for Dummies, as anyone who really wanted to know the Word of God would read it in the original Hebrew and Greek. When you say that moral people of the early republic read the Bible, you really mean only a select few who could read Hebrew and Greek.

In the past year, I read Galileo's Two New Sciences and Gilbert's De Magnete. I never did get through much of The Wealth of Nations. We have been presented with summaries and glosses and expositions on those and all of the other classics that going back to the sources is perhaps just an intellectual exercise. And that may apply to the Declaration and Constitution.

I am willing to say that neither Greg nor Brandt actually supports the Constitution. They are not alone in condemning the 16th and 17th Amendments. That makes me wonder how they feel about the 19th Amendment, or the 28th. I never hear anyone complain about the 22nd Amendment, but it can be argued that if the founders had wanted such a limitation, they would have put one in. It is ironic that political conservatives who claim to honor the Constitution nonetheless condemn the public debt in direct violation of the 14th Amendment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Greg and Brandt, the real horror of George Orwell's 1984 was not just the destruction of Winston Smith and Julia - though there was that - but the destruction of the English language.

Damage done the English language is directly linked to a decay in morality... where words are "bent" to fit behavior.

And you can thank the hypersensitive politically correct word-nazis of the left for it's current devolution... where speaking just one wrong word can end a career by the hysterical shrieks of the perpetually emotionally offended.

I am willing to say that neither Greg nor Brandt actually supports the Constitution.

Your willingness to say something doesn't always mean it's correct, Michael. :wink:

I've stated before that I have no problem with taxes as they are just business expenses factored into the price of goods and services I sell.

I never hear anyone complain about the 22nd Amendment, but it can be argued that if the founders had wanted such a limitation, they would have put one in.

That's explained by the implied decency of the time. It was a long time between then and 1947, The founders had assumed that any President would be principled enough to voluntarily to leave office and return to private life when his first term was finished.

That makes me wonder how they feel about the 19th Amendment, or the 28th.

You must mean the 27th... also a long time between then and 1992.

As far as the 1920 19th Amendment and women voting... In my opinion only property owners should have earned the right to vote. Once moochers and public union looters vote for their own benefits... it's game over.

And it's game over.

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am willing to say Brandt supports the Constitution, whatever that means (whoever that is). Does the SCOTUS?

--Brant

if Greg quotes me, how does that mean I support what he says about the quote?

my name, btw, isn't Flumelwinkerstein :smile:

Brant

r

a

n

t

Brant Gaede or Brant Gaede (The first letter tends to dominate the color of the whole word as in rant or ant or yellow or fellow.) "Gaede" is actually white, to me, but I can't type it on a white background and it looks as strong as the first name in my mind (mind)

"Michael E. Marotta" (Because the "E" doesn't color fit, if it were my name I'd drop it for "Michael Marotta.")

When I see standard black text I have to consciously make the color translations--it's not automatic and I don't think it's true synesthesia, something I've never investigated for I don't care

most words, especially common nouns, tend to stay black to me--I think a capital letter--not all caps--makes it easier to ascribe a different color, but I need the black base to start with unless I remember the color from an earlier ascription

I can't work off this too well, but if it were common I'd adjust

I have no idea of the significance of any of this palaver--it's no talent of any value except to me for fun and another way of not tolerating boredom

Sic transit gloria mundi!

stop me, I can't help myself!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was always better in the good old days… In elementary school and junior high school, we took apart The Star Spangled Banner and learned words such as "haughty" and "reposes." But, ultimately, that could be no more (or less) successful than a Catholic catechism. We were subjected to all manner of indoctrinations during the 50s and 60s. Much of that was far beyond mere rote memorization. In fact, the analysis actually opened the door to deep questions about what America really is. One of the best books for me at the time (1969) was Howard Fast's Citizen Tom Paine. Fast was a communist -- but you knew that, right?

On the shore dimly seen through the mists of the deep,

Where the foe's haughty host in dread silence reposes,

What is that which the breeze, o'er the towering steep,

As it fitfully blows, half conceals, half discloses?

Now it catches the gleam of the morning's first beam,

In full glory reflected now shines in the stream:

'Tis the star-spangled banner, O! long may it wave

O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

And where is that band who so vauntingly swore

That the havoc of war and the battle's confusion,

A home and a country, should leave us no more?

Their blood has washed out their foul footsteps' pollution.

No refuge could save the hireling and slave

From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave:

And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave,

O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave.

O thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand

Between their loved homes and the war's desolation.

Blest with vict'ry and peace, may the Heav'n rescued land

Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation!

Then conquer we must, when our cause it is just,

And this be our motto: "In God is our trust."

And the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave

O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"By the shores of Gitche Gumee,
By the shining Big-Sea-Water,
Stood the wigwam of Nokomis,
Daughter of the Moon, Nokomis.
Dark behind it rose the forest,
Rose the black and gloomy pine-trees,
Rose the firs with cones upon them;
Bright before it beat the water,
Beat the clear and sunny water,
Beat the shining Big-Sea-Water."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Niggers" was changed to "darkies" in 1936...see how well that worked! "Niggers all work on de Mississippi, Niggers all work while de white folks play..."We don't change minds, we just change the words!Hope and change! Hope "whitey" does not figure it out and change the meanings of words.Utopia!A...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am willing to say Brandt supports the Constitution, whatever that means (whoever that is). Does the SCOTUS?

Brant,

I've screwed up and spelled your name like that before, but I've never seen you do it.

:smile:

Michael

EDIT: Oops. Didn't check. You were ragging MM, who did it--twice.

Greg and Brandt, the real horror of...

. . .

I am willing to say that neither Greg nor Brandt actually supports the Constitution...

NOOOOOOOOOOOWWW I understand... :smile:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now