Categories
Opinion The Last Word

Minority Rule: Want Real Majority Leadership? Vote!

Imagine living in a country where a minority group that comprised a mere 6 percent of the population was in complete control. A country where a full 94 percent of the populace had no say whatsoever in their own governance. Does this sound like some future dystopian version of America, given our present trajectory? Sorry. This was the political reality of America at the time of the first presidential election in 1789.

Many of those who signed our Declaration of Independence would have argued that the phrase “all men are created equal” only referred to land-owning Christian white males. At the time, the Colonists were still bound to that lowest form of oligarchical governance, the monarchy. The above statement was not penned as an enlightened declaration of inclusion, but solely to invoke a political break from that monarchy.

Wikimedia Commons

Thomas Jefferson

Thankfully, Thomas Jefferson, though himself a slave owner, was also a student of the Enlightenment. He understood that the prophetic words, however he had to spin them at the time, would eventually come to be taken more literally. Fifty years after the signing, Jefferson said of the Declaration: “May it be to the world the signal of arousing men to burst the chains under which ignorance and superstition had persuaded them to bind themselves, and to assume the blessings and security of self-government.”

At the time of the Revolution, free Americans were divided into two classes. You were either somebody, which almost exclusively meant being born into wealth and privilege, or you were nobody. And nobodies, even white male nobodies, were not allowed to vote. Additionally, prior to 1828, some states’ “religious tests” required voters to be professed Protestants. The last vestige of the property ownership exclusion was not abolished until 1856. Even then, some states continued to disallow non-taxpaying citizens the vote for another half-century.

The Fourteenth Amendment of 1868 opened the voting booth to naturalized, non-native-born citizens. Although the Fifteenth Amendment extended the right to vote to former male slaves in 1870, most Southern states — Tennessee being foremost among them — concocted such Jim Crow-era stumbling blocks as poll taxes and literacy tests that persisted until the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Women, regardless of race or status, could not vote prior to ratification of the 19th Amendment in 1920. The final expansion of American voter eligibility did not occur until 1970, when the minimum voting age was lowered from 21 to 18.

Now try to imagine living in a country where only 43 percent of the population was in control. Even after all of our incredible progress in the ensuing 227 years since the first presidential election, that’s the percentage of the total population who voted in 2016. Certainly an improvement, but still hardly representative.

So here we are, 20 years into the 21st century, and still we have to ask ourselves to what degree do “ignorance and superstition” continue to rule our lives? Although Tennessee ranks 14th in the nation in terms of our number of eligible voters, we are 49th when it comes to actual voter turnout. In 2016, 2.4 million Tennesseans stayed home and did nothing, which is not only inexcusable, but unacceptable. The next time anyone tries to convince you that Tennessee can’t be “flipped,” consider the fact that nearly twice as many of our people failed to uphold their civic duty as voted for Trump in 2016.

As we continue to transform into a more enlightened and egalitarian nation, the pace of this effort will be wholly dependent upon the action, or inaction, of every eligible voter. We can only “assume the blessings and security of self-government” when every person who can legally vote, votes. Without question, 2020 will be the single most significant election since 1860 — the election that was immediately followed by the bloodiest decade in American history. And the outcome could very well be determined by those who, in the past, for whatever reason, have chosen not to participate.

If you care about your country, if you care about preserving democracy for future generations, your job this election is not only to vote, but to motivate every other citizen who sat out 2016, especially those who would not have had the right to vote in 1789, to vote in 2020 like their lives depended on it.

Voter registration deadline is October 5th. Early Voting is October 14th through October 29th. Last day to request an absentee ballot is October 27th. The election is November 3rd.

Aaron James is a seventh generation Tennessean, retired architect (Texas and New York), self-published author, and Independent Centrist candidate for U.S. Senate.

Categories
Editorial Opinion

Defining and Defending the First Amendment

Amendment I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The foregoing words are those of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, an afterthought, as it were, to the hard work, good intentions, and labored-over compromises of the delegates from 13 heretofore independent colonies that had presumed to be independent states of the European kind and had adhered up to that point to a looser compact, the so-called Articles of Confederation.

It was taken for granted by the representatives in Philadelphia of these far-flung entities that the casual sort of association created by the Articles just wouldn’t do to protect the newly won independence of any or all of them. That is why they had agreed to meet in convention and why they availed themselves of guidance from the likes of George Washington, the military leader who had guided their revolt against British authority, and Jefferson, Madison, Adams, and the rest of those illustrious sorts who, in our own time, go by the name of Founding Fathers.

It was recognized that the 13 states so joined would have conflicting interests, the most obvious of which was slavery, an institution so glaringly in conflict with the ideals of a “more perfect union” that it would need, ultimately, to be abolished by the sword, at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives, North and South, and of an economic devastation of the latter territory that would take a century or more to repair.

Once that Civil War was ended and the union restored, virtually the first order of business was a series of new constitutional amendments, the 13th through 15th, all designed to safeguard the “new birth of freedom” that a martyred president had spoken of in the course of the war.

Interpreting those new anti-slavery amendments has, all things considered, been the major focus of Supreme Court concern ever since, and resistance to them has, more or less successfully, been contained by the liberty of expression guaranteed in that very first amendment cited above. Differences of opinion on the subject of equality still do exist, unfortunately, and they are protected by that amendment.

There are limits to free expression, however, and the Court’s 1919 decision in Schenck v. United States, spells them out succinctly as prohibiting dangerous speech, defined by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes as “shouting ‘fire’ in a crowded theater.”

Last weekend’s actions by the faux confederates and neo-Nazis who bore torches and arms to Charlottesville, Virginia, in a deranged last stand in defiance of both equality and free discourse, an un-peaceable assembly that began in violence and ended in murder, was clearly well beyond the limits prescribed by Justice Holmes, and it is likely to generate an updated definition of the limits of public expression.

We do not have to guess at the consequences of such actions, after all. The legacy of the aforesaid Civil War and the ravages of the Second World War are testament enough to them.

Categories
Editorial Opinion

Calling to Account

All of a sudden, we’re getting into Rip Van Winkle territory. But the familiar universe doesn’t require a full 20 years, any longer, to be unrecognizable. Last year at this time, we here in Memphis knew that Nathan Bedford

Forrest was developing into a persona non grata — at least with a major part of our population. The name “Forrest Park” had already given way to the unoffending and somewhat antiseptic moniker, “Health Sciences Park.” But, a year ago, nobody was threatening to move the Confederate general’s statue or transfer his grave back to Elmwood Cemetery. Now both goals are established parts of the political agenda.

And it wasn’t long ago that we were reading articles celebrating the positive moral influence of comedian Bill Cosby on minority youth, and touting his then forthcoming revival tour as a wholesome experience for family audiences. Now, the man is in utter disgrace as an alleged serial rapist, unable to show himself in public for fear of derision — or encountering another process server.

And, hey, you local Democrats who look forward to buzzing up to Nashville for the next ceremonial Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner, be aware that by the time you get there, the names are likely to have been changed to reflect society’s suddenly unforgiving attitudes. Thomas Jefferson, the author of the Declaration of Independence, is lately fallen from favor, due to his status as a slave-owner. And Andrew Jackson? He’s lucky that it was Alexander Hamilton, and not himself, that was recently bumped off his spot on a currency note. Not only was Jackson a slave-owner, he was guilty of massacres of native Americans in Florida and of “ethnically cleansing” that territory for the sake of white folks wanting to move in. Democratic parties in Connecticut, Missouri, and Georgia have already purged the two names from the title spot for their annual banquets. And Tennessee state Democratic chair Mary Mancini has just sent out an email to party cadres informing them, via an official missive titled “The Legacy of Andrew Jackson,” that the Tennessean whose Hermitage mansion is still a much-visited tourist site may be about to lose his lease as a state hero.

Here’s Mancini’s clincher: “In 2015, we may very well decide to name our annual event after someone who better exemplifies who we are today. We may not. But either way, let’s not shy away from the conversation.”

Forrest, Jefferson, Jackson, and Dr. Huxtable! All gone from the icon list. Who’s next? George Washington?

The bottom line is that, in an age when social media have opened up everybody’s closets for inspection, nobody gets away with anything. Not even historical figures. We don’t know whether that’s a good thing or a bad thing. But it’s a thing, and we’d better get used to it.