How come those who wanted to stay a part of England in 1776 didn't prevent the Continental Congress of 1776 from declaring independence? Was it that, even though they disagreed they were still fundamentally honest people?
At the Constitutional Convention of 1787, Wikipedia says of the delegates:
Are you saying that it is impossible today to convene a body of fundamentally honest people of similar stature as before? I'm not talking about people who agree on all issues, but people who agree to abide by a governing principle of debate and deliberation.
The states had originally appointed 70 representatives to the Convention, but a number of the appointees did not accept or could not attend, leaving 55 delegates who would ultimately craft the Constitution.Almost all of the 55 delegates had taken part in the Revolution, with at least 29 having served in the Continental forces, most in positions of command. All but two or three had served in colonial or state government during their careers. The vast majority (about 75%) of the delegates were or had been members of the Confederation Congress, and many had been members of the Continental Congress during the Revolution. Several had been state governors. Just two delegates, Roger Sherman and Robert Morris, would be signatories to all three of the nation’s founding documents, the Declaration of Independence, the Articles of Confederation, and the Constitution.
More than half of the delegates had trained as lawyers (several had even been judges), although only about a quarter had practiced law as their principal means of business. There were also merchants, manufacturers, shippers, land speculators, bankers or financiers, two or three physicians, a minister, and several small farmers. Of the 25 who owned slaves, 16 depended on slave labor to run the plantations or other businesses that formed the mainstay of their income. Most of the delegates were landowners with substantial holdings, and most, with the possible exception of Roger Sherman and William Few, were very comfortably wealthy. George Washington and Gouverneur Morris were among the wealthiest men in the entire country.
Are you saying that America has turned the corner, and no such people can be found anymore to try to take back their country?
-PJ
In recent years, probably half of the Tea Party conservatives we've elected and sent to congress have gone wobbly or full rino. Why? Are they bad people? Maybe a small percentage were deceitful and had no intention of fighting the liberals. I believe the vast majority were truthful.
What turned them was the structure of congress. In a popularly derived congress, the way to remain in office is to, well, remain popular. In general that means robbing one citizen to give his wealth to another. Giving in to mob demands isn't outrageous, it is what is certain to happen in popularly derived institutions.
Back to history. Only eleven years had elapsed from our revolt to drafting the constitution. The confederation was totally inadequate to promote our collective happiness, our general welfare. As you pointed out, many of the same men who drafted the constitution, also had extensive experience in state and confederation government.
Most of them would go on to serve in the new constitutional government.
So, in a short period of time, much the same men served in our early state governments, the confederation, and our early constitutional system, yes?
Under the confederation, the people were hurting, our debts were massive, and European nations looked forward to picking up the pieces of our soon-to-fail revolution.
Under the constitution we spread across a continent, and within a hundred years became a second tier industrial powerhouse.
My point is that the structure of government is more important than the people we send to govern us. Under the Articles we were weak and at each other’s throats. The same people prospered under the constitution, because the structure of the constitution protected and promoted freedom and property.
THAT is why I regard repeal of the 17th as the keystone to our possible revival. Our framers knew that democratic republics always fail. They created a lasting structure that Americans of 101 years ago foolishly threw away.
As long as it is in the interest of individual senators to vote for more goodies, they will do so. They will personally prosper as they get rich in office, while their nation suffers and dissolves.
By all means elect conservatives, but it is insufficient if we wish to save what remains of our republic.