Can We Still Save the Country?

Photo by Philip Arambula on Unsplash

The United States is in a state of collapse.

We can quibble over the degree to which this collapse has already happened or is still in the process of occurring. However, most honest observers would admit that our core institutions have become so degraded that some may be irreparably damaged. Others are so corrupted that only immediate and extensive repair could possibly salvage them. Anyone who argues that the US is still a free, sovereign land holding firm to its founding principles is either blind or a liar.

It is my firm belief that if we are going to save America, in whole or in part, it will require a comprehensive review of our political and legal systems, as well as the philosophical, cultural, and even theological foundations behind them. This review would require the scrutiny of an audit, though in this case the objects of the review would be our own laws, systems, and actions throughout our history. The appropriate persons would examine our systems and codes with the meticulous eye of a detective investigating what has transpired and why.

Below I offer some of my thoughts on why I think a review of this sort is necessary and what it would look like. As always, these are my thoughts on the idea at this moment of time. I think about this often, so my thoughts are always open to refinement as I parse through certain notions or come into contact with additional information.

As for a comprehensive audit, I am not predicting that such a review will occur. I concede that the idea seems highly unlikely to materialize. My assertion is merely that it needs to occur. I think it’s essential for the health of our country. First, we need a collective acknowledgment of just how far we have departed from our founding principles upon which the government was established. Second, without a clear picture of where we are and where we as a nation want to go, there is no way we can fight the collapse that is upon us.

Whether you personally believe that our nation is the victim of sinister networks deliberately seeking her demise or merely suffering the natural effects of political, cultural, and societal entropy (I believe the former but don’t discount the latter as well), something must be done to correct the path we find ourselves on.

Hence the need for a comprehensive review of our history, systems, and the construction of a plan for the way forward.

In this piece, I am referring specifically to a review that occurs via a convention at the national level. The states are free to hold their own individual conventions and assess their own systems but here I am referring to an audit of US systems.

At the same time, I withhold opinion on any of the various movements currently in progress that aim to conduct conventions of some sort. In the abstract, I feel that a convention is essential to any positive way forward, but I feel no obligation to comment here on any specific group that might be attempting to convene at this time.

Let me first state that in proposing this way forward, I am operating under several key assumptions. Whether these are true remains to be seen, but for the purposes of explaining my idea of this audit, the following assumptions are necessary to move forward:

1. America can still be salvaged, in whole or in part. Here I deliberately use the term America as opposed to the United States because I don’t necessarily require that the currently existing country known as the United States continue in its present form — with exactly fifty states plus its territories, etc. in the current borders — to argue that America has been saved.

2. America is worth saving, in whole or in part. Her principles, institutions, and virtues are noble enough to warrant retention by her citizens.

To achieve any worthwhile resolution, there must be a collectively desired end state that is clearly stated. That end state probably looks something like:

American systems are improved via legally acceptable means (i.e., the amendment process, for example) that result in a closer approximation to the original founding principles and/or the principles most desired currently by the people of the states.

To achieve this end state, the broad agenda of the review would look something like the following:

1. Identify the political and legal systems operative in the United States at the time of her founding as identified in documents such as the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution for the United States. Determine their impact on the legal codes. Consult the guiding principles mentioned in the Declaration of Independence. Identify the predecessors of these systems, whether colonial in nature or borrowed from older societies such as the British, Roman, or Greek) and their impact on our institutions when founded. Identify the broader philosophical presuppositions that served as a framework for these systems. As applicable, identify the theological underpinnings that served as the bedrock upon which these systems were established. Investigate the relationship between culture and these systems.

2. Determine the degree to which legal and extralegal deviations from these original systems have occurred. Assess why they occurred. Perform a comparative analysis of the current status of our systems with the original design of those systems as outlined in our founding documents.

3. Determine which of these extralegal deviations, despite their unlawful nature, were improvements upon the original systems. *Note: studying these extralegal deviations does not necessarily imply sanction but is necessary in terms of providing as comprehensive an assessment as possible.

4. Determine which of these extralegal deviations resulted in the usurpation of authority by elements within the government and the ensuing impacts (excess taxation, war, bad laws, etc.) on institutions, relations with other sovereign entities such as the states, and the impact on the people. Identify the agencies or institutions whose existence or charter is a violation of constitutional law.

5. Identify the legal and/or political gaps that resulted in these deviations. Identify enforcement shortfalls that may have also resulted in these deviations.

6. Identify which of the original systems and institutions must be retained, which should be reformed, and which should be discarded. Provide assessments as to why each system or institution falls into the assigned category.

7. Recommend mechanisms through which system improvement can be achieved. These could include amendments to the Constitution or if deemed necessary, the wholesale repeal of the current Constitution and establishment of a new government structure via a newly drafted constitution (as was done in 1787–1788 with the replacement of the Articles of Confederation by the Constitution). *This is not to suggest that repeal of the Constitution is necessary or desirable, but rather allows for maximum latitude of possibilities by including all legal options.

Who would convene such a review and who would participate? It is important that the states take the lead. We must remember that the states gave the federal government its authority. The states sent delegates to Philadelphia in 1787, which resulted in the Constitution, and the states were the sovereign bodies that ratified that document, replacing the Articles of Confederation.

What type of individuals would participate in the review? This is really for the states to decide, but I envision delegates made up of constitutional lawyers, other legal scholars, historians, economists, political philosophers, religious leaders, and other assorted individuals with the knowledge, intellect, and integrity to conduct a meticulously comprehensive and impartial audit.

There are many potential challenges to conducting this type of review:

1. We could end up with less constitutional protections.

2. The states could surrender even more authority to the federal government.

3. Our political and legal systems could be further hollowed out and this destruction could be enshrined in amendments or in other legally binding ways.

4. The review process could become co-opted by the same political machinations that already control the government.

It is a real risk that a convention proposing changes to our systems and legal structure could result in less freedom. That is highly possible. My response to that is that evil networks already control our government and operate entirely outside the legal framework as it is. Our constitution has already been reduced to nothing more than a piece of paper. By forcing ourselves to come to terms with our history and current status, the good and the bad, we are at least operating openly. We are admitting our shortcomings. We are explaining to ourselves where our country has gone wrong. We are also potentially admitting the mistakes or fallacies that were “baked in the cake” at the beginning. By addressing these, we can also determine how to make the changes that would be essential to righting the ship.

In the end state I depicted above, I wrote that the systems would be improved to realign with “the original founding principles and/or the principles most desired currently by the people of the states.” That means that the states and the people of the states could decide to implement systems that result in diminished freedoms, and they may see this as an improvement. This is very possible. Sadly, many of our citizens are constitutionally illiterate, generally uninformed, and easily manipulated. This is why the states must operate judiciously in selecting persons of unimpeachable character as delegates.

For the review to accomplish anything positive, only individuals of the highest integrity should participate. The most dangerous obstacle to the review is listed above as #4. If the process becomes corrupted by the same cabals of treasonous individuals who have subverted our country thus far, then the process will fail, nothing will be achieved, and the collapse of our country will continue.

The Philadelphia Convention of 1787 was conducted in secret because the delegates had chosen to draft a new constitution rather than amend the Articles of Confederation. Now is not the time for secrecy. Our country has operated in secret for far too long and that is a large part of why we are in the situation we are in.

Any convention held with the express purpose of performing a system review must operate in an open capacity. This does not necessarily mean that daily reports should be given to the public. That would be both impractical and unwise. However, the states should perhaps appoint an oversight committee that receives periodic reports on the progress of the convention’s review. This will prove challenging, but it is imperative that the states own the oversight responsibility rather than any particular branch of the federal government.

There is no guarantee that this type of review will result in positive change. However, absent some type of convention of this sort, the ongoing collapse will continue unabated. Sure, there will be a lot of talk, but no action and America’s decline will be terminal.