Hypocrisy of the Tea Party Movement and Constitutionalists

Throughout modern history, many governments have attempted to best serve their citizens. So far, the longest surviving government structure has been Democracy. This comes as little surprise as Democracy experiments with policies to best serve it’s citizenry. It is a trial and error approach, or a scientific experiment, if you will.

The US Constitution and the US Bill of Rights are founded upon the principle of “living documents”, allowing policies to change in order to meet the greater good of the people. Yet the framework of our government remains intact. Amendments are designed as legal and legitimate alterations of our founding papers, promoting a growth of governmental understanding of ever changing needs. This would not be the case if our Democracy was not built upon this scientific theory.

Even with the founding principles of “all men are created equal”, our founding papers were not suited well enough to promote that notion. Prior to the ratification of the 14th Amendment in 1868, our founding papers were interpreted as only granting freedom to Caucasian males. Blacks and women were not accorded with the same equality of freedoms as that of a Caucasian male. As science has not proven Caucasian males to have a superiority, thus it has proven that other ethnicities or gender are equal in all respects to Caucasian males. Thus our Constitution was amended to preclude the exceptions, reinforcing the notion that “all men (mankind) are created equal”.

The 18th Amendment is another experiment, prohibiting the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors. This experiment was to be a solution to the nation’s poverty, crime, violence, and other ills and was embraced by tens of millions of Americans. Unfortunately, Prohibition not only failed in its promises but actually created additional serious and disturbing social problems throughout society. With the failure of the prohibition experiment, the 21st Amendment corrected this wrong.

Our founding papers are founded upon the belief that human reasoning is enough to govern its citizenry, and we have been experimenting with this notion ever since. Our Democracy is based on laws to protect the well being of its citizenry, not to promote religious or monarchial doctrines. Our government is based upon scientific experimentation to best serve the people, not to subjugate non-Caucasian males.

Prior to the 14th Amendment, States alone determined the qualifications of Citizenry, prohibits state and local governments from depriving persons of life, liberty, or property without due process, and requires each state to provide equal protection under the law to all people. In 1833, though many State’s Constitutions, are modeled after the United States Constitution and federal laws, those state constitutions did not necessarily include provisions comparable to the Bill of Rights. Thus after determining the experiment of States Rule failed, the 14th Amendment was ratified to provide equal freedoms to all American citizenry, regardless of which state one resides in.

Yet the Constitutionalists of today and the Tea Party Movement want to take us back to only the original Constitution and Bill of Rights. They choose to ignore the progress made of the other Amendments, which have proven to be beneficial to the American populace. They deny that our Democracy is based on what George Washington termed the “Great Experiment”. They denounce the notion of a “Living Document” and scientific experimentation of governorship. They rely on their interpretation of the intention of the founding fathers, not based upon fact or evidence, but rather out of beliefs. This is an anti-intellectual argument thrust upon the intellectual experiment that human reasoning is the best basis for any government. They deny that our Democracy is based on the “greatest experimentation of government”. Their claims to the original intent of our Founding Fathers is not founded in the same intellectual ideals of our Founding Fathers, and thus are hypocritical at best.

What is happening to our society?

What has happened to today’s society? We seem to be separated into two groups of thought, those who believe they are right and those who intellectually look at the issues and form opinions based upon facts and evidence. Truth has become a rare commodity.

Those who believe they are right cling to this notion with a religious zeal. They know they are right and nobody can tell them anything to the contrary. Facts and evidence are “liberal ideals” which are ignored to prove their righteousness. Anyone who believes anything different from them are “living in a fantasy” or are “misinformed”.

Those who form their opinions upon facts and evidence are not quite as quick to assert they are right. They keep an open mind and their opinions are not set in stone. When proven wrong through logic or reason, they alter their viewpoint. They are not righteous, but are open to civil discourse in their discussions.

But why are those who believe they are right know they are right? Is it because they are surrounding themselves with people who believe the same thing? Are they only listening to messages whom they agree with? And why the devotion to being right? Is this a result of immediate gratification? Does money equate into being right, the more material objects they own mean they are more right than anyone else?

Those who believe they are right ignore historical facts, scientific facts, and evidence, nor can they substantiate their beliefs with reason or evidence. Yet they cling to their beliefs without just cause. Many claim that all Muslims are evil, that President Obama is a socialist, or that only Capitalism benefits society. Many believe that the recession and TARP bailouts were enacted by President Obama, that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction since they haven’t been found yet, or that tax cuts only for the rich create jobs. Facts, evidence, or reason are not required to make these assertions, yet these are the beliefs they cling to.

Facts and evidence show us that many of their assertions are incorrect. The recession began under the Bush Presidency, the TARP bailout was signed into law by President Bush, Saddam Hussein admitted that he did not have weapons of mass destruction after Dessert Storm (but how could he publicly acknowledge that under Iran’s threat of invasion?), and tax cuts for the rich do not create jobs (or at least not permanent jobs). Yet those who form their opinions on facts and evidence are shunned. They are called liberal thinkers or sometimes socialists, but are always condemned for going against popular beliefs of the righteousness.

Remarkably, the stance against intellectuals are propagandist beliefs at best, and ignorance of truth at least. The righteous take opinions as facts, view compromise as turning the other to their way of thinking only, and refuse to engage in honest discussion to uncover truth. They claim that we, as Americans, must be united, yet they are the ones dividing the country with their “with us or against us” mentality. They claim that we must take our country back, but they fail to realize that no one took their country away from them. How can we have a civil discussion over today’s issues, or vote for elected officials among those with such righteous views? How can we unite as a society with such an extreme of a belief? What has happened to today’s society?

-Silence Dogood