Sunday, October 19, 2008

What happens when what you fear is the only option?


In the process of learning about the origins of the Constitution of the United States, I looked back at the governments bailout of the banking system and realized how contrary it was to everything that the founding fathers worked for. The constitution that they wrote had the primary objective of outlining a government that would be ruled by the people, for the people, not interfering with their privacy, property, or the economy. With a profound fear of oppressive governments, this document was supposed to be a solution. Despite relatively few amendments, the country has followed the constitution word for word for hundreds of years, taking pride in upholding the sense of individuality that it protects. This bailout is different. By implementing hundreds of billions of dollars into the banks, the government has effectively bought their way into the economy, regulating it to try and save it from this downturn. The very thing that the founding fathers worked to remove from their government has come back. So what happens when perilous times force that which you fear to be the only perceivable solution? Maybe it's when idealism steps aside to allow pragmatism to take over. The American people fear changes in the constitution, they fear socialism, they fear government power, but when it comes down to it, the constitution was written in a different time, and the ideals of founding fathers may not be enough to keep the country in order. Whether a change in the Constitution is needed or not, i don't know, but the current situation in America definitely leads one to ask.

2 comments:

chadbrochill17 said...

I think this is one of the reasons why some people had mixed feelings about the bailout. I believe that people oppose turning around the economy, but some do not think the government should interfere. Even though the Constitution was written in a different time, the authors knew they could not foresee everything it would need to pertain to in the future, so they tried to make it broad enough to apply to all situations throughout the ages. They were also pragmatic and knew they could not cover everything, so they made it possible to amend it. Is it time for a change? The people will have to decide.

the silc said...

sam, nice analysis of the current financial situation! the questions you bring up are examples of solid reasoning...

what do you think about fdr's actions to get america out of the depression? was that a time when pragmatism was needed? is the same pragmatism needed today?