The Opportunity to Plan America's Future

Students “should study American History in particular, so they can plan the future,” according to Woodrow Wilson, the young President of Princeton University in his 1902 inaugural address.  “Every concrete thing (America) has done has seemed to rise out of some abstract principle, some vision of the mind,” Wilson said.  “A general serviceableness  …  broad training would help them relate to all types and see their point of view.”

Is it any wonder that many issues ordinary citizens face today are strikingly similar to the issues of a previous day?  After all, the problems are the creations of man.  So shouldn’t it be a simple enough proposition to fix them?

The learning process begins with asking questions, which promotes and inspires critical thinking.  An effective platform evolves through the telling of stories.  When one story is begun, it starts out clear and linear, like anyone’s family tree.  But, then it branches out, loops back and links up with others, until what students think is a simple piece of cloth is suddenly a more complex tapestry.  The classroom is a place so full of curiosity that, through story telling, we can see their lessons and connections to one another.

Based on my experience, students of US History do appear to be in a preferred position to best plan the future, at least when measured alongside those who choose to neglect its study.

But there are legitimate concerns that opportunities afforded to students of US History are not favorable for the development of their genius.  The prospects to exercise opportunities and capitalize on their intellectual position are equally unfavorable.  While the US Constitution guarantees ordinary citizens the “equal protection of the laws,” there is no known guarantee of the opportunity to plan America’s future.

Through history, we learn that today 20% of all Americans control 85% of all wealth, and a full 40% of all Americans possess absolutely no wealth to speak of.  Haven’t we seen this movie before?  What appears to be lacking is not intellectual capacity, for even an ordinary citizen can achieve a significant measure of intellectual achievement, but equal access to America’s economic opportunity structure.

And while the lack of equal access has traditionally been more acute among America’s people of color, it is not strictly limited to that particular demographic.  Women are and have been vulnerable, too, having been denied the right to vote until almost a full 60 years after the black man.  Imagine, then, being both black and a woman?

On the other hand, those who ask questions expose themselves to criticism from a group which claims legitimacy as the sole defenders of the faith of the American spirit.  Dissenters, arguing that while they love what America represents it can still be made better, are seen as un-American.  Challenges posed to majority rule and the status quo are viewed as unpatriotic.  Sometimes, the voices of dissent are silenced by the ruling party through various means.  This is as unfortunate as it is dangerous to our civil liberties.

While the acquiescence of the minority and defeated candidates is a necessary maxim of self-governing society, there is a real, quantifiable danger of the “tyranny of the majority.”  In his 1801 Inaugural Address the nation’s new third president, Thomas Jefferson, sought to assure his defeated foes by proclaiming a sacred principle:

that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will, to be rightful, must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal laws must protect, and to violate would be oppression.

An “error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it.”  In other words, we are all loyal Americans, whose patriotism should not be questioned and who should not be at another’s throats.

But every difference of opinion is not a difference of principle.  We have been called by different names brethren of the same principle.  We are all republicans: we are all federalists.

Jefferson’s tolerance for differences of opinion is admirable.  We all make mistakes.  For some reason, I have been unable to master the wisdom of an old proverb, although I continue to relate it in the hope that others will have better luck: “A wise man learns from his own mistakes, but a wiser man learns from somebody else’s mistakes.”  Can ordinary citizens learn from this lesson as we attempt to plan America's future?

-Michael D’Angelo

Map Keys

Ever try to read a road map without understanding the map “keys?”  Ever wonder how another's mind can be shaped through simple control of a reading list?  Ever marvel at a master teacher's ability to connect with those who yearn only for a nudge in the proper direction?

As we ponder our evolutionary spirit, an excellent starting point in learning how to read maps is to command the “science of human nature.”  Many historical figures of note have characterized the science as being most useful.  Its variety of behaviors is constant and predictable.  Its elements have changed little through time.  So if we were to recognize the patterns in these behaviors, then plug in an assortment of random ordinary people, places and dates, the mystery of understanding history would be unlocked forever.  That being the case, can there ever be anything really new in the world?

After human nature, other map keys follow naturally.  The first is a consciousness of how we see things.  At one time or another, we’ve all heard the expression of a person who “looks at the world through rose colored glasses.”  It’s meant to describe someone who is filled with optimism, sees the positive in everything, to a fault.  That someone cannot be deterred from the mission of turning an abstract idea into a reality, sometimes against all odds.

Lenses, filters and walls affect how we see things.  Why do we have them?  And what benefits and detriments do they provide?  Our eyes are nothing more than lenses, so the eye doctor says.  Thanks to the retina and optic nerve, they allow us to see things.  We call this vision.  Filters help us emphasize certain things and minimize certain other things.  Walls provide the mechanism to permit some to see all things, on their side of the wall, and to deny those on the other side from seeing anything at all.  Fences are a sort of wall.

Another map key involves a consciousness of what we are actually witnessing.  One of the more challenging difficulties of human existence is distinguishing what is real from what only appears to be real, separating the wheat from the chaff.

And who provides access to the video room?  Powerful corporate interests behind a seemingly invisible curtain employ talented Madison Avenue professionals to influence the ordinary citizen's reality.  They expertly filter what we see and don’t see for their own purposes.  Oil companies advertise an attention to the environment.  Pharmaceutical companies focus on safety detail and quality of life advances.  Financial services firms tout the “fact” that the average returns of their managed investments typically well exceed historical norms over time.

But, do we ever stop to consider what these major industries are not telling us about their prized, revenue generating products?  Or the money they spend their obscene profits on?

Finally, they manage to transform things we want into things we somehow need, like prescriptions for restless leg syndrome.  Perhaps it would be productive to needs from what are merely wants.  We may be surprised to learn that in the end our needs other than bread and water are quite modest.

Understanding who provides access to the video room may provide the essential force in identifying what is necessary to preserve the American Dream.  Is the American economic opportunity structure of once upon a time still generally and readily available?  Are the yelps for less government today loudest among those whose funding sources are the monopolizers of economic opportunities?  Are the two questions fairly related?

Perhaps the central question that has vexed the most inquisitive minds involves the equality of all men under our constitution and laws.  Theodore Roosevelt said our country’s history has faced two great crises: first, when it was formed, and then, again, when it was perpetuated.  T.R. articulated the substance of the third great crisis which was upon us, the struggle "to achieve in large measure equality of opportunity," bringing it back to life in 1912 if only briefly.  A full 100 years later, America is still trying to figure out how to solve this confounding problem of our time --- completing our nation's great unfinished business.  In truth, all roads still lead to this place.

Perhaps we are at a crossroads.  It’s a good thing the ordinary citizen has map keys.  We must respect the powerful forces of conservatism in discharging the obligation to protect the status quo.  Otherwise there would be chaos and anarchy.  But we also must respect the need for change, understanding that if we do not change we must surely die.  Is one principle more important than the other?

Do we play it safe and fly under the radar, shining our beacon from under a bush?  Do we have any further obligation?  Or do we act more aggressively --- perhaps throw caution to the wind --- knowing that the harder we push for change the greater the assurance of our own personal destruction?

-Michael D’Angelo