The Test (Part One)

Firstly I apologize for the massive delay in continuing The ‘76er. As I’ve said before this blog isn’t my job (yet) so I’ve been busy. But again, I thank you for your continued support.

 Anyone who visits this blog could probably tell that I am a staunch believer in the Constitution and the people who developed it. I believe Locke, Paine, and other helped lead to the Declaration of Independence and the Declaration led to the Constitution which defends the American Idea. That document is our earthly guiding light on how to conduct our business as a nation.

Over the past year or so I’ve been in an increasing number of political debates and discussions (go figure). The talks vary from gun rights, to political parties, to states rights and other topics. But it generally all boils down to how things work under our Constitution, the importance of that document, and the ideas of those who drafted it. Much as you’ve heard the slogan “freedom isn’t free”, which it isn’t, I would also say “democracy is not self-sustaining”. The Founders never thought that once they signed that piece of paper that it was a free ride afterwards. Whenever a republic gets lax it falls. That has been seen throughout history.

Despite this I’ve run into a number of people that seem to think either democracy is just a spectator sport or that the Constitution can stop people from doing things. While the words have meaning they are just drops of ink on some paper. The words can mean all they want but without people who believe in them that’s all they will remain. When this topic comes up, especially in regards to government power, I find a lot of people who say what I’ve called the most dangerous words an American can say: “they can’t do that”.

Remember what I said the most dangerous enemy we face is? It’s denial. That can, and quite often, goes hand in hand with saying a person can’t do something just because a piece of paper says they can’t. “They can’t take our guns away”. Why not? “They can’t limit our speech”. Why not? “They can’t suspend the Constitution”. Why not? By the way that last one, suspending the Constitution, they totally can by law. Does that one make sense?

So I got to thinking. If it’s on paper does it really make a difference? If a government tries to operate outside of the defining law of the land can they be stopped? Or if that government knows that the law can get in their way do they have to change it to achieve their goals? Let’s take a look.

Below are some articles taken from a constitution during the 20^th century. Take a moment to read through them.

·         The [nation] is a republic.
State authority derives from the people.

·         As far and as much the [government] does not make use of its right to legislate, the states are entitled to legislate. This does not apply to the areas in which the [government] has the exclusive right to legislate.

·         The [representative assembly] is composed by the representatives elected by the…people.

·         Members of [the representative assembly] represent the entire nation. They have to follow nothing but their conscience and they are not bound to instructions.

·         The…President is elected by the entire nation.
Every [citizen] who has finished the 35th year of his life is eligible…

·         The [nation’s] President, when taking his office, swears the following oath:
I swear to devote my energy to the welfare of the….people, to increase its prosperity, to prevent damage, to hold up the…constitution and its laws, to consciously honour my duties and to exercise justice to every individual.

·         Judges are independent and subject only to the law.

·         All [citizens] are equal in front of the law…

·         …communities speaking a foreign language may not be deprived by legislation of their national identity, especially in the use of their mother language in education, in local administration and jurisdiction.

·         The rights of the individual are inviolable…

·         Every [citizen’s] home is an asylum and inviolable…

·         Privacy of correspondence, of mail, telegraphs and telephone are inviolable…

·         Every [citizen] is entitled, within the bounds set by general law, to express his opinion freely in word, writing, print, image or otherwise…

·         It is the supreme obligation and natural right of the parents to raise their offspring to bodily, spiritual and social fitness…

·         Youth is to be protected against exploitation as well as against moral and spiritual dissipation, bodily neglect…

·         All [citizens] have the right to assemble peacefully and unarmed; such assemblies do not require any prior notification or special permit.

·         The education of the youth has to be provided by public institutions.

Text in brackets replaced terms that would have otherwise revealed the name of the nation.

Now here’s the part I want you to do. I want you to try and figure out what government operated with this constitution. I’d prefer you didn’t try and use Bing or Google but that’s fine. But I want you take just a moment of your time and see if you can discover it. This is part of the “get involved” thing about democracy.

I’ll give you a few hints. The constitution was in effect for roughly 26 years. The country was formerly a monarchy. This country is in Europe. That may give it away if you just guess. But go ahead and try. If you get it right and want to let me know email the blog: freedomblog76@gmail.com.

In a few days I’ll make another post revealing the answer and go over the results.

Thank you for reading. God bless all of you and God bless the United States of America.