The American People
Words sometime convey meaning far beyond their simple definition. The frequency of use and context often reflect the innermost feelings, and sometimes the tongue betrays the motivations of even the best orator.
It is common of late to hear our political leadership refer to “the American people.” “Our job is to provide jobs for the American people,” they say.
White House adviser David Axlerod said a recent survey shows that "two thirds of the people polled have warm and positive feelings about him (President Obama), regardless of what they thought about his policies. I think he's got a great relationship with the American people."
The President himself said, “There have been times where I have said I’ve got to step-up my game in terms of talking to the American people about issues like health care.”
Others have commented on how previous presidents and political leaders more often used the term, “American citizens.” The ongoing debate about immigration has probably tempered politicians speech so they find the term “citizen” somewhat exclusive (and thus injurious to a potential voting block).
But it is the words that proceed “American” that betray an unsavory characteristic of many in today’s governing elite. It’s the word “the”, and what that “the” replaces, that reveals a ominous trend in many of our government’s leaders.
From George Washington through Reagan, Clinton, and both Bush’s, the word was not “the”, but rather “my fellow”. Like “My fellow Americans” or “My fellow citizens.” Do a survey of two centuries of Inaugural addresses and you will see it time and again.
Even President Obama used the term, “my fellow citizens” in his initial presidential address. But that usage was apparently a historical formality, and since then, in both Democratic and Republican circles, the “my fellow” has been replaced with the “the”.
The distinction is obvious. “My fellow” infers the equality envisioned by the Founding Fathers. America was to be a nation governed by “fellow citizens”, not a succession of monarchs, aristocrats, and blue bloods. Every time one of our leaders replaces those words and speaks condescendingly about his duty to “the American people,” we should hear the echo of Washington and Adams and their fellows raising their warnings.
Those early men had lived through the intolerant governments headed by those who were qualified only by wealth or parentage or papal decree. They knew that even the most noble of men would succumb to the lure of unchecked power. So check and balances must be built to prevent such abuse. There were to be no “lords” or “commoners.” Before the law and through God-given rights, every man was to be free and equal.
To be anything more or less swings us back to the aristocratic cancer that ate away at Great Britain, France, Germany, and most of the nations of the world.
But now our elected officials provide exceptional benefits for their own use, like military aircraft for travel. They legislate for themselves special insurance and retirement benefits. They entertain dignitaries based on wealth or fame or power. In all these things they display aloofness and condescension.
In their high and exalted thoughts, they are far above the uninformed, untalented masses they serve. After all, they reason, they were elected because they were superior, with policies and ideas that far excel any others.
So since they know best, many of our leaders boast that they only do what is best for the American People. “Fellowship” may have been sufficient for the Republic two hundred years ago, but today they think, “lordship” seems the better way for American governance.
The framers of our Constitution knew the failings of men more that we acknowledge. The inability of any man’s heart to withstand the enticements of power, is a flaw that remains to this day.
We should ever be diligent to protect our freedoms. The equality of men and opportunity that our Constitution ensures are God-given rights to be protected, no matter what the cost. Even if it means the replacement of leaders who seem to have forgotten that they, like us all, are mere fellow citizens in this great land.
It is common of late to hear our political leadership refer to “the American people.” “Our job is to provide jobs for the American people,” they say.
White House adviser David Axlerod said a recent survey shows that "two thirds of the people polled have warm and positive feelings about him (President Obama), regardless of what they thought about his policies. I think he's got a great relationship with the American people."
The President himself said, “There have been times where I have said I’ve got to step-up my game in terms of talking to the American people about issues like health care.”
Others have commented on how previous presidents and political leaders more often used the term, “American citizens.” The ongoing debate about immigration has probably tempered politicians speech so they find the term “citizen” somewhat exclusive (and thus injurious to a potential voting block).
But it is the words that proceed “American” that betray an unsavory characteristic of many in today’s governing elite. It’s the word “the”, and what that “the” replaces, that reveals a ominous trend in many of our government’s leaders.
From George Washington through Reagan, Clinton, and both Bush’s, the word was not “the”, but rather “my fellow”. Like “My fellow Americans” or “My fellow citizens.” Do a survey of two centuries of Inaugural addresses and you will see it time and again.
Even President Obama used the term, “my fellow citizens” in his initial presidential address. But that usage was apparently a historical formality, and since then, in both Democratic and Republican circles, the “my fellow” has been replaced with the “the”.
The distinction is obvious. “My fellow” infers the equality envisioned by the Founding Fathers. America was to be a nation governed by “fellow citizens”, not a succession of monarchs, aristocrats, and blue bloods. Every time one of our leaders replaces those words and speaks condescendingly about his duty to “the American people,” we should hear the echo of Washington and Adams and their fellows raising their warnings.
Those early men had lived through the intolerant governments headed by those who were qualified only by wealth or parentage or papal decree. They knew that even the most noble of men would succumb to the lure of unchecked power. So check and balances must be built to prevent such abuse. There were to be no “lords” or “commoners.” Before the law and through God-given rights, every man was to be free and equal.
To be anything more or less swings us back to the aristocratic cancer that ate away at Great Britain, France, Germany, and most of the nations of the world.
But now our elected officials provide exceptional benefits for their own use, like military aircraft for travel. They legislate for themselves special insurance and retirement benefits. They entertain dignitaries based on wealth or fame or power. In all these things they display aloofness and condescension.
In their high and exalted thoughts, they are far above the uninformed, untalented masses they serve. After all, they reason, they were elected because they were superior, with policies and ideas that far excel any others.
So since they know best, many of our leaders boast that they only do what is best for the American People. “Fellowship” may have been sufficient for the Republic two hundred years ago, but today they think, “lordship” seems the better way for American governance.
The framers of our Constitution knew the failings of men more that we acknowledge. The inability of any man’s heart to withstand the enticements of power, is a flaw that remains to this day.
We should ever be diligent to protect our freedoms. The equality of men and opportunity that our Constitution ensures are God-given rights to be protected, no matter what the cost. Even if it means the replacement of leaders who seem to have forgotten that they, like us all, are mere fellow citizens in this great land.
Comments