Before we can decide who “we” are perhaps we should give thought to who “we” have been. We were a small – and weak – “country” ( and it took an effort to get to that point) comprised of mostly rural people with a diversity of ideas and beliefs. The picture of a single nation of homogeneous thought and consistent beliefs is mostly myth. The Constitution did not happen calmly, nor was it embraced blindly by all. Washington once wrote to Jefferson asking how much liberty could the “people” handle. It was admittedly an experiment, and for all intents and purposes still is; the experiment has been chaotic and emotional – and still is, even though the nature of the nation has changed dramatically from being small and rural to large, powerful, wealthy and mostly urban. “We” don’t even agree on how that happened, because for the most part most of us really don’t know; even if we think we do, or for that matter even think about it.
Nevertheless that’s where we are. We mouth the words that are the concepts of freedom, liberty, free-markets, property rights and individualism; but most of us see them through our own eyes in the context of our own lives, and do not agree with various interpretations. We still have a diversity of ideas and beliefs, but with additions to the original mix they have changed and widened with the changes in the environment which is our nation. And some of the bases for the concepts have been muddied; I would state morality as one, but that, as I said in Part I may be being modified by interpretation; but such fundamentals as honesty and responsibility must remain if that which we expect for our future is to maintain. Without honesty and responsibility the concept of national vision that we have held cannot be sustained, and we will become what most of the rest of the world is and has always been – and might always be.
Books have been written on what that is, so we must leave it at that. Either one understands it or doesn’t, and therefore accepts that who we were is who we still are or not; but more than that it will determine whether that is what we WANT to be, or not. So what is it that we WANT to be? I contend that is a difficult question for most to answer because they haven’t thought much about it beyond the hazy blur of poorly understood words and concepts, how they apply, and what they mean. That is the question that is plaguing us and most of us are ill equipped to handle. We are in the process of trying to answer it anyway; intellectually, emotionally, individually, collectively, and even in terms of pure survival, for some. Change is with us because we cannot contain it, everywhere we look; we cannot contain it, but we can direct it, if we know where we want it to progress. We don’t yet, and it will take us a period of time to do so, if we are able. In the meantime, because we have not directed effectively in the recent past (some say ever), we are faced with a more difficult task today, and the longer we remain in flux the more difficult it will become. We are facing challenging choices and no matter how we deal with them they will be painful, and we do not like pain and will resist it, individually and collectively.
I think about it a lot, and worry; I think we all should, but not with paranoia – or even resignedly. We have the strength within us as a nation to deal with it; but it will test us mightily to do so, and how we face the test will determine the results. Time is running short and the ultimate pain is growing, but perhaps that will provide us with the incentive we need to make the difficult choices. Ultimately we WILL come out of it, but the view at the other side is not yet clear.
