Does this disturb anyone other than me?

[ksinger]

Could it be that your cousin simply wasn't paying attention when "American History" was being taught in elementary school? Because honestly, my 13 yr old cousin studied that a few years ago... and she doesn't remember jack from that year either. Not because they didn't teach it. She just doesn't remember. And she's an "A" student.

Snort. Word to that. Honestly, if you weren't a bonafide history geek in highschool, how many people can say they really absorbed all that much from back then anyway? Seriously. I am intensely interested in history. NOW. But in highschool I had a bad teacher AND didn't really get into it much. I had a good class or two in college, but still don't retain all that much from those classes. It just wasn't all that relevant yet, to me. As my husband has (sadly) stated, history at 16 is almost (almost) wasted on them, if for no other reason that developmentally they have just recently started realizing that there is a whole world out there that isn't THEM centered. He quips that many of them are barely fully sentient at 16. To them, history can seem dull because they have not seen enough to see the point of it yet. History does truly become more interesting to most people later, after they've lived a bit longer - LIVED long enough to have parts of their lives become history.

 

[Burberrygirl]

Could it be that your cousin simply wasn't paying attention when "American History" was being taught in elementary school? Because honestly, my 13 yr old cousin studied that a few years ago... and she doesn't remember jack from that year either. Not because they didn't teach it. She just doesn't remember. And she's an "A" student.

I think this is most likely the case. I'm a college student and I took two history classes this semester. One was about colonial up until the early 19th century and the other was 19th century to the beginning of the 20th century. In high school I took World History, AP U.S. History and A.P. Government. I had an excellent teacher for AP U.S. History and learned a lot from him. The same things I learned in AP U.S. History were covered in my two history classes this semester. A lot of it I remembered but there was plenty of things I had forgotten. I don't think your cousin wasn't taught about the founding fathers, usually that's taught pretty early on... she's probably just forgotten most of it.

Also, I think that she's just learned about Eli Whitney so it's still fresh and fun to talk about. My dad loves learning about history and I'll often tell him about things I just learned. Sometimes he'll ask me about other things I studied in high school and I don't always remember.

Now, I don't agree with many of your comments. Other people have already addressed them so I will just leave it at that...

 

[Burberrygirl]

Could it be that your cousin simply wasn't paying attention when "American History" was being taught in elementary school? Because honestly, my 13 yr old cousin studied that a few years ago... and she doesn't remember jack from that year either. Not because they didn't teach it. She just doesn't remember. And she's an "A" student.

Snort. Word to that. Honestly, if you weren't a bonafide history geek in highschool, how many people can say they really absorbed all that much from back then anyway? Seriously. I am intensely interested in history. NOW. But in highschool I had a bad teacher AND didn't really get into it much. I had a good class or two in college, but still don't retain all that much from those classes. It just wasn't all that relevant yet, to me. As my husband has (sadly) stated, history at 16 is almost (almost) wasted on them, if for no other reason that developmentally they have just recently started realizing that there is a whole world out there that isn't THEM centered. He quips that many of them are barely fully sentient at 16. To them, history can seem dull because they have not seen enough to see the point of it yet. History does truly become more interesting to most people later, after they've lived a bit longer - LIVED long enough to have parts of their lives become history.

Great point! My dad has become more and more interested in history in the last ten years. I'm going to mention this to him, I'm sure he'll agree that this applies to him. I actually bought him Jimmy Carter's White House Diary for Christmas (1976 was the first presidential election he voted in).

 

[CUSO]

I hope I can still post pics of the earrings I bought for my wife without being lambasted.

 

[packrat]

JD and my brother are HUGE into history. I've no clue. Took the classes in school but..sadly..Had this thread been titled "Who was Eli Whitney" it better have been multiple choice, and I would've gotten it right, but if I'd been asked outright, no, wouldn't have remembered right off the bat. Frederick Douglass..I'd tell you he's a black guy and I remember pictures of him kind of looking off to the side and he reminds me of the professor friend of Dr. Huxtable's on the Cosby Show. I had to google him just now, and I remember the pictures. When I saw "abolitionist" I said Ohhh yes, ok, I remember. 20 years later, I readily admit I need google b/c I don't remember.

When JD talks of various wars and what happened during and what came to be after.."During the Civil War blah blah blah" Me:"Wait, the Civil War, that's the Blue and the Gray right?" We watched that movie in school, that's what I associate w/it. He'll say something about Pearl Harbor and I'll say "Is that Tora Tora Tora? Which war was that during?"

I sound like an imbecile, and I totally own up to it. I didn't continue to study *any* of that stuff after school. I did what I needed to pass my tests, and actually sometimes not even that much b/c one teacher gave credit if you tried, mostly b/c I wrote funny answers that were then discussed in class. JD and my brother read constantly about various times in history and they love it. Some things will come back to me when the kids get into that in school, but until then, it'll have to be multiple choice or relate it somehow to a movie or a picture.

 

[Lula]

I hope I can still post pics of the earrings I bought for my wife without being lambasted.

Yes, of course!! Bling is our common language here, even if we disagree on other topics.

 

[PinkTower]

I was assigned as an armorer/firearms expert, providing them with proper working/efficient killing devices necessary to help good American folk like most of you guys to sleep peacefully at night, and uphold ideals that I did not realize were in the process of dissapearing.

Are you saying that minorities are responsible for ruining this country?


This thread reminds me of an exerpt from "Wicked":

"Elphaba, where I'm from, we believe all sorts of
things that aren't true. We call it - "history."

A man's called a traitor - or liberator
A rich man's a thief - or philanthropist
Is one a crusader - or ruthless invader?
It's all in which label
Is able to persist"

What a streach! Now the discourse has turned sour.

CUSO, you're posting on a jewelry board largely populated by independent, well-educated women -- what did you expect? Women have been left out of the history books, too, as I well remember from the arguments we had in my high school history classes in the 1970s.

Thanks, all, especially Lula, I love what all of you posted. So, so true. I love reading all the posts when a topic like this comes up. When I said my 16 yo was memorizing Cicero, no one on here batted an eye. You were right, this IS an unusually well educated group. Lively topics are fun.

 

[slg47]

Speaking as a college prof ... I think it's a lot more about HOW they learn than it is WHAT they learn.

Repeating the same tired old facts about George Washington (half of them tall tales - see, wooden teeth, cherry tree)? Useless, and not conducive to learning. Complicating history by learning about less significant figures who nevertheless had a huge impact ... and who might help them gain perspective on current social issues, a la Frederick Douglas? Useful. By 16, people need to start thinking in an interdisciplinary and multi-faceted fashion, or they're going to fall behind.

Could you maybe say a little bit more about why it distressed you? Me, I would have been bugged by the fact that it was all American history, with nothing resembling a nod to the previous 4000 years of civilization ....

OK honestly I did not read anything past this post but I had to to the bolded part. What are you a professor of?

 

[Bunny007]

I hope I can still post pics of the earrings I bought for my wife without being lambasted.

CUSO, you've hardly been lambasted in this thread. Stick around awhile and maybe we PS ladies will toughen you up

 

[Clio]

While I probably wouldn't have spent quite so much time on Eli Whitney back when I was teaching US history, he was an incredibly important figure (and, incidentally, a white guy from New England). The invention of the cotton gin turned southern plantation slavery from a system that was waning in many parts of the South (as tobacco became less profitable) to a rapidly expanding, vigorous, and profitable system. This was one of the major causes of the Civil War, which I would argue is the most important event in our nation's history. (naturally, others may disagree)

Ditto Frederick Douglass. He was a polarizing figure who did a great deal to show northerners (most of whom were indifferent to slavery at best) the evils of the institution. He was seen at the time as very influential - and rightly so. From about 1830 to the CW, abolitionists, while still a minority in the North, were growing in influence and number, and this too had an impact on the coming of the war and on the way that it was conducted. Douglass was one of the leaders of this movement. After the war, he continued to work for extension of the franchise to African Americans and to women.

This is not to downplay the importance of the founders. But American history is much more than its founding.

 

[anitabee]

wow! i'm actually really impressed with what they're studying. i'm a high school social studies teacher and think those historical characters are perpetually fascinating and are worth the time they're being studied.

i'm not sure why you're vexed by this? students study all sorts of people from the past and just because they may not be focusing on one of the founding fathers at this point in time doesn't mean that they haven't been studied or won't be in the future.

i would worry less with what "hasn't" (in your opinion) been focused on and more on what IS being explored. i've taken a bunch of black history courses and am particularly interested in the whole abolitionist movement and frederick douglass. this is an important part of american history and needs to have a good chunk of time devoted to it.

kudos to your cousin's teachers

 

[kelpie]

I went to a tiny highschool with a liberal curriculum that was loosely affiliated with a church. My American history teacher had majored in African-American studies and it was something he was very passionate about. As a result, our American history class focused almost entirely on the African-American experience, figures and diaspora since 1850. I felt like it really did us a disservice as this was supposed to be our general education class but was taught like a specialty. So I will be the dissident that shares CUSO's concern. It's not about ignoring the contributions and struggles of African Americans (which should absolutely be studied) but rather hoping you get a well rounded education and a basic understanding of the whole American landscape. I have another friend from Central America where education is really not revered as an institution or universal right. In high school he was only taught "History of the Mayans" which is really sad if you are only looking at such a narrow perspective.

 

[Hudson_Hawk]

Please forgive my passion on this toppic. A little background on me. I am a Navy veteran. I spent 6 years attached to a SEAL platoon. I must be clear on this point, I WAS NOT A NAVY SEAL, I was assigned as an armorer/firearms expert, providing them with proper working/efficient killing devices necessary to help good American folk like most of you guys to sleep peacefully at night, and uphold ideals that I did not realize were in the process of dissapearing. Now, I, along with many of my fellow Veterans share the same opinions on many topics. One of the topics we discussed was public education seemingly wiping out the parts of history they do not like. Now I wont be able to convince anyone of this unless they do their own in depth research on this topic, not just speculation.

Also My uncle-in-law is the chair of the History department at a large West TX university, he does inform me that he tells students when they take standardized tests to do this: If the question is about an old white historical figure, chose the answer that reflects negatively upon the person, if it is about anyone else, it will be the answer that reflects positively.

I have a 3 star Marine general and a 2 star Navy admiral in my family. Also, several sergeants, a couple of corporals, one goofy PFC, and a WAVE (remember them?).

I would like to say that not one of them share your views.

At all . . .

Ditto. My father is a Retired Lt. Colonel in the US Army and my husband was a Captain in the Army. Both are conservative independents and neither of them share your views.

 

[monarch64]

Please forgive my passion on this toppic. A little background on me. I am a Navy veteran. I spent 6 years attached to a SEAL platoon. I must be clear on this point, I WAS NOT A NAVY SEAL, I was assigned as an armorer/firearms expert, providing them with proper working/efficient killing devices necessary to help good American folk like most of you guys to sleep peacefully at night, and uphold ideals that I did not realize were in the process of dissapearing. Now, I, along with many of my fellow Veterans share the same opinions on many topics. One of the topics we discussed was public education seemingly wiping out the parts of history they do not like. Now I wont be able to convince anyone of this unless they do their own in depth research on this topic, not just speculation.

Also My uncle-in-law is the chair of the History department at a large West TX university, he does inform me that he tells students when they take standardized tests to do this: If the question is about an old white historical figure, chose the answer that reflects negatively upon the person, if it is about anyone else, it will be the answer that reflects positively.

I fought for this? I put my life out there for this?

Now when my 16 yr old cousin said she was tought in her education history almost nothing about founding fathers (and she is honors and strait A student) and she knows everything about most minority historical figures, I believe her. it is just 1 reason I now regret fighting.

Sorry about venting....

Am I the only one who assumed that CUSO was a woman???

 

[Imdanny]

I was trying to stay out of this thread, but could be.

 

[ksinger]

I went to a tiny highschool with a liberal curriculum that was loosely affiliated with a church. My American history teacher had majored in African-American studies and it was something he was very passionate about. As a result, our American history class focused almost entirely on the African-American experience, figures and diaspora since 1850. I felt like it really did us a disservice as this was supposed to be our general education class but was taught like a specialty. So I will be the dissident that shares CUSO's concern. It's not about ignoring the contributions and struggles of African Americans (which should absolutely be studied) but rather hoping you get a well rounded education and a basic understanding of the whole American landscape. I have another friend from Central America where education is really not revered as an institution or universal right. In high school he was only taught "History of the Mayans" which is really sad if you are only looking at such a narrow perspective.

I don't know how old you are (ie - what rules you played under in highschool) so I'll ask - did you have to pass a state-mandated end-of-instruction (EOI) test at your tiny highschool? I suspect you did not, because if you had, your history teacher would have been judged on his ability to get you to pass said test, and therefore likely would NOT have been teaching only his pet era/slant. And if your school was "loosely affiliated with a church" it sounds like it was private or some variation of private (the different kinds of charters/public/private blends from state to state can be mind-boggling), and they play under different rules than publically funded schools. It sounds as if there was no standard curriculum there, and that teachers pretty much did what they wanted. I assure you, it is not nearly as fluid at the fully public schools.

 

[JewelFreak]

Where I live, in the south, our local public schools DO NOT TEACH THE CONSTITUTION. Parent volunteers actually go in & give extra classes on it. I was shocked breathless when some of them told me. We cannot maintain a free country without good knowledge of the Constitution & what led to its writing & how it engenders freedom that is still the envy of the rest of the world (why else do you suppose they're trying to immolate it?).

I get worked up about the fragmented history courses -- women's history, gay history, black history, immigrant history -- can't it be put together in perspective as OUR history???? Big deal recently when the State school muckymucks decided they weren't going to teach any history prior to 1870 "to keep it relevant for the kiddies." What's more RELEVANT than how we got to be a country? How that magnificent constitutional document helped us become the most prosperous & unfettered country in the history of mankind? How the grandchildren of the founders almost blew it all up but succeeded in making us feel more like ONE country than a collection of states? Every group has contributed to this marvelous whole -- but it is a whole, not merely a hodgepodge of separate tribal groups. Aargh.

--- Laurie

 

[Cehrabehra]

I hated history in school. It was all a bunch of disassociated and very dry factoids that got my eyes fluttering. I slept almost every day in my just after lunch us history class. There was nothing keeping me awake.

As an adult somewhere along the way all of it kind of found a place in a relevant timeline in my mind and everything started to become interesting. NOW when I hear about history I have somewhere to put it in my head. NOW I wish I could go back and take those classes...

 

[JewelFreak]

Yeah, don't we all, Cehra. Me too. I have become a Civil War buff since moving south -- like my father & grandfather. Thought I'd get to know the flavor of the south by reading a book on the war from the Confed. point of view, and I was hooked. It does all relate -- that was a seminal point: the outcome of problems with the making of the Constitution and the true beginning of this country feeling like one country in its aftermath. All connected w/economic & trade history as well as social issues. Amazing how it comes alive, partly because you've lived enough to see how the past shapes the present, the present the future.

It's a shame that history teachers are so few who can show it as interactions of a bunch of humans, leading here & there, rather than a list of dates.

--- Laurie

 

[kelpie]

[quote="ksinger|

I don't know how old you are (ie - what rules you played under in highschool) so I'll ask - did you have to pass a state-mandated end-of-instruction (EOI) test at your tiny highschool? I suspect you did not, because if you had, your history teacher would have been judged on his ability to get you to pass said test, and therefore likely would NOT have been teaching only his pet era/slant. And if your school was "loosely affiliated with a church" it sounds like it was private or some variation of private (the different kinds of charters/public/private blends from state to state can be mind-boggling), and they play under different rules than publically funded schools. It sounds as if there was no standard curriculum there, and that teachers pretty much did what they wanted. I assure you, it is not nearly as fluid at the fully public schools.[/quote]

I graduated in 2000 and didn't have to take an EOI. It was a private school in MD and the teachers had a lot of freedom with the curriculum which in this case was bad but I also had several classes designed just for me. An education is what you make of it.

 

[ksinger]

Where I live, in the south, our local public schools DO NOT TEACH THE CONSTITUTION. Parent volunteers actually go in & give extra classes on it. I was shocked breathless when some of them told me. We cannot maintain a free country without good knowledge of the Constitution & what led to its writing & how it engenders freedom that is still the envy of the rest of the world (why else do you suppose they're trying to immolate it?).

I get worked up about the fragmented history courses -- women's history, gay history, black history, immigrant history -- can't it be put together in perspective as OUR history???? Big deal recently when the State school muckymucks decided they weren't going to teach any history prior to 1870 "to keep it relevant for the kiddies." What's more RELEVANT than how we got to be a country? How that magnificent constitutional document helped us become the most prosperous & unfettered country in the history of mankind? How the grandchildren of the founders almost blew it all up but succeeded in making us feel more like ONE country than a collection of states? Every group has contributed to this marvelous whole -- but it is a whole, not merely a hodgepodge of separate tribal groups. Aargh.

--- Laurie

JewelFreak - where are you exactly? What state? Is there an article or state site that addresses this new standard? I ask because I'm certain my husband would be interested to read it. Are the public schools where you are south really offering "gay history" or "women's history" courses at the highschool level? I've never heard of that, but I'm not up on everything, certainly.

 

[Imdanny]

I think you appreciate history the older you get. I was lucky enough to get one chance to visit England and see London, Stratford, Stonehenge, Oxford, and the Crown Jewels (especially the Crown Jewels!).

But I was 14 and I know I would appreciate it so much more now. Not that I would have be an more "amazed" but I would know more what to look for and I would have a clearer memory of what I had seen.

 

[ksinger]

Where I live, in the south, our local public schools DO NOT TEACH THE CONSTITUTION. Parent volunteers actually go in & give extra classes on it. I was shocked breathless when some of them told me. We cannot maintain a free country without good knowledge of the Constitution & what led to its writing & how it engenders freedom that is still the envy of the rest of the world (why else do you suppose they're trying to immolate it?).

I get worked up about the fragmented history courses -- women's history, gay history, black history, immigrant history -- can't it be put together in perspective as OUR history???? Big deal recently when the State school muckymucks decided they weren't going to teach any history prior to 1870 "to keep it relevant for the kiddies." What's more RELEVANT than how we got to be a country? How that magnificent constitutional document helped us become the most prosperous & unfettered country in the history of mankind? How the grandchildren of the founders almost blew it all up but succeeded in making us feel more like ONE country than a collection of states? Every group has contributed to this marvelous whole -- but it is a whole, not merely a hodgepodge of separate tribal groups. Aargh.

--- Laurie

JewelFreak - where are you exactly? What state? Is there an article or state site that addresses this new standard? I ask because I'm certain my husband would be interested to read it. Are the public schools where you are south really offering "gay history" or "women's history" courses at the highschool level? I've never heard of that, but I'm not up on everything, certainly.

I'm bumping this in hopes that you will let me know, JewelFreak, what state you're in. My husband would be seriously interested to read about your state's standards, particularly the bit about no history before 1870 being taught. Standards (or lack of same) pretty much get discussed morning, noon, and night around our house, and we try to keep up on developments around the country.

 

[swimmer]

Where I live, in the south, our local public schools DO NOT TEACH THE CONSTITUTION. Parent volunteers actually go in & give extra classes on it. I was shocked breathless when some of them told me. We cannot maintain a free country without good knowledge of the Constitution & what led to its writing & how it engenders freedom that is still the envy of the rest of the world (why else do you suppose they're trying to immolate it?).

I get worked up about the fragmented history courses -- women's history, gay history, black history, immigrant history -- can't it be put together in perspective as OUR history???? Big deal recently when the State school muckymucks decided they weren't going to teach any history prior to 1870 "to keep it relevant for the kiddies." What's more RELEVANT than how we got to be a country? How that magnificent constitutional document helped us become the most prosperous & unfettered country in the history of mankind? How the grandchildren of the founders almost blew it all up but succeeded in making us feel more like ONE country than a collection of states? Every group has contributed to this marvelous whole -- but it is a whole, not merely a hodgepodge of separate tribal groups. Aargh.

--- Laurie

JewelFreak - where are you exactly? What state? Is there an article or state site that addresses this new standard? I ask because I'm certain my husband would be interested to read it. Are the public schools where you are south really offering "gay history" or "women's history" courses at the highschool level? I've never heard of that, but I'm not up on everything, certainly.

I'm bumping this in hopes that you will let me know, JewelFreak, what state you're in. My husband would be seriously interested to read about your state's standards, particularly the bit about no history before 1870 being taught. Standards (or lack of same) pretty much get discussed morning, noon, and night around our house, and we try to keep up on developments around the country.

Yikes, I went to HS in Tennessee and you better believe we studied the Constitution. In AP US we memorized vast tracts of it and yes, we had some time to spend on the cotton gin and other causes of the Civil War as well. However, regarding the founding fathers, I remember learning how these very human men made their accomplishments even more impressive. Well, other than Elbridge Gerry. Washington was a real estate schemer who helped create our capitol, Jefferson was less of a womanizer than Franklin, but his views on equal rights need to be tempered within the context of his time and his long standing relationship with a woman he OWNED.

I went on to earn a masters in history focusing on how constitutions are developed and re-interpreted around the world, in large part because of the fabulous foundation I received in HS. However, it was way back in college that I learned that quite frankly, that the US is not exceptional, every country has an amazing story and so I majored in non-western history. I have taught AP world history for years, wherein the US in only mentioned in the last month of the course as the US has only been pivotal in recent history...and the Chinese would argue that our self-importance has led to our current plight. Our economy is no longer the largest, we produce very little, and our debt is crippling...sounds rather like Ancient Rome, the British Empire, and a few different dynasties whose flames once burned brightly and are now relegated to dusty history tomes. I personally find that world history is wildly more important than US history for young learners and wish that US was only taught in perhaps 8-9th grade. Understanding the changing role of the US in the world is critical for our young students who will be competing for jobs with millions of students around the world and must understand the lay of the land.

 

[swimmer]

Oh and I would be very concerned about parents coming into classes to teach their interpretation of the Constitution. Yike, hopefully they read Novus Ordo Seclorum and the notes from the Constitutional Convention rather than watching Glenn Beck who is so horrifyingly wrong about almost everything related to the Constitution that I watch him while on the elliptical just to get my heart rate up more. Incidentally, he dropped out of the one college class he ever took. But that is another thread entirely!

 

[ksinger]

Oh and I would be very concerned about parents coming into classes to teach their interpretation of the Constitution. Yike, hopefully they read Novus Ordo Seclorum and the notes from the Constitutional Convention rather than watching Glenn Beck who is so horrifyingly wrong about almost everything related to the Constitution that I watch him while on the elliptical just to get my heart rate up more. Incidentally, he dropped out of the one college class he ever took. But that is another thread entirely!

Amen to both of your posts Swimmer, as usual. But as we both know, putting America in a greater perspective (in the larger picture we aren't quite as exceptional as we think..or...rather, we're exactly as exceptional as every other empire such as Rome or Britain has has told itself it was. Hubs does teach about American Exceptionalism of course, though as a mindset of our country, not as incontrovertible reality) is verboten or at least very much more difficult in the polarized denial-of-reality land that we find ourselves these days. I do wish the DH could teach world, since it was his focus in college and has been his true love all his life, but the powers that be say he teaches American.

And yes, that thing about parents coming in to teach set off alarms for me too. I did in fact have an entire piece written that I decided not to post. But it included this little bit that I will post:

"Some think the constitution should be taught, and have been told it isn't. But is that true? Or is that the perception of a group of parents who simply think the schools don't do enough to teach what they think is important? Why aren't those parent fighting to get that curriculum BACK in, rather than teaching it themselves? Something doesn't ring right about this whole situation. Is there some other reason they take that on themselves? Does that group of parent have their own axe to grind?"

 

[swimmer]

Good questions KS. I wonder, if the Constitution and every pithy quote from the founding fathers is so vitally important, then why aren't they being taught at home? I keep hearing about the Constitution like it is some sort of sacrosanct document, but it was a compromise crafted by men who knew that it would be revised over and over again. They didn't have all the answers and they were fully aware of that (slavery anyone?). This idea of revering a document seems to me as ridiculous as revering the fabric in a flag. It is the people that make a document and a nation work.

 

[MichelleCarmen]

Am I the only one who assumed that CUSO was a woman???

Monarch - he posted in another thread that he's a stay-at-home dad & also posted a photo of himself somewhere.

It is weird reading many posts by someone and then discovering the person is actually a guy, huh? lol

 

[Imdanny]

Oh, you must be referring to this...
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.html

"questioning the Founding Fathers’ commitment to a purely secular government"

Ignorance is as ignorance does.

 

[ksinger]

Good questions KS. I wonder, if the Constitution and every pithy quote from the founding fathers is so vitally important, then why aren't they being taught at home? I keep hearing about the Constitution like it is some sort of sacrosanct document, but it was a compromise crafted by men who knew that it would be revised over and over again. They didn't have all the answers and they were fully aware of that (slavery anyone?). This idea of revering a document seems to me as ridiculous as revering the fabric in a flag. It is the people that make a document and a nation work.

Concretizing a thing, be it object, document or book, as the reality when it merely points to an underlying reality, it a time-honored human tradition. It's very seductive, because the reality it points to is messy, ambiguous, fluid, and not terribly objective, and people don't like that. We like THE RULES, and we like them spelled out nice and tidy and EASY. Pity the world isn't that way though.

The minute the Constitution's ink was dry, those supposedly oh-so-wise founders were fighting over how to interpret it and implement it going forward. It was a living, breathing, CHANGING mental construct, the moment it was written.