We throughly changed in the two generations after the revolution. Originally we were agrarian traders and mercantile traders. Foreign credit, monitary values and tarrifs effected almost all. As always immediate changes in government were sought to solve immediate problems. Judiciary field of influence was very limited in such a world.
In a couple of generations we were a nation of producers, builders and growers for our own consumption except for the tobacco and cotton interests. We became more concerned with internal matters to a certain degree and all political thought focused on sectional interests. Within three generations those sectional interests were so heated that again immediate changes in government were sought for immediate interests.
Destruction on an unknown scale followed. In the two days of the battle of Shilo alone more Americans died than in our entire previus existance.
Two more generations passes and we again had turned inward to economic self_centeredness and passed the 17th amendment crippling the Senate and then adopted a National income tax.
In each age law makers claim statecraft but foist immediate solutions to current concerns.
Would we have survived if the anti-federalists had won? I doubt it. I think the French malignancy would have found fertile soil in a Henry Nation just as it did in the intemperate portion of the mind of Jefferson.
I really apreciate your reflections on our forms of government. I guess walking between the Twin Towers on the morning of 9/11 gives you a perspective on the importance of reflective thought and national analysis.
Now THAT’S a fine post. Leave it to you, old FRiend, to bring up societal issues as the root cause of political upheaval. The real question is where do we go from here? To me, the Constitution, as a form of “limited” government, is a dead letter. We’re just playing out the string. Then again, the people are clueless. Real leadership is nowhere to be found.