The US nation's founding document of the US Constitution, which is largely the focus of this article, has a mostly untold history behind it, but instead of this real history we have been fed a lot of mythology.
The early capitalist class in the US was comprised of land speculators (George Washington was most prominent), merchants, and large plantation owners who used slave labor. They wanted to curb the British Crown's restrictions, which existed for various geopolitical reasons (mostly directed at France), on their activities, and to keep the American colonies as classic colonies to supply British industrialists with cheap raw materials. Thus the rich Americans revolted, but they needed the aid of ordinary free Americans who consisted of small farmers, craftsmen, and other workers. In order to do this they enlisted various democratic spokesman like Patrick Henry (who is quoted in the headline) and Thomas Paine to spread word about democratic ideology. The most revolutionary idea of all was formulated by Jefferson who wrote in the Declaration of Independence the following key principles:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. [my emphasis]The central idea of democracy as defined here inspired millions across the globe ever since: the legitimacy of political arrangements are rooted in the consent of the people! No, governments were not divine creations of God or Allah, they were created by people, and should serve the needs of all the people, or they are illegitimate.
Of course, the new American ruling class had completely different ideas, but they were stuck with this democratic ideology after the successful conclusion of the Revolutionary War. (Notice that in the subsequent first draft of the constitution, they made no mention of these principles. And, Thomas Jefferson was conveniently away in Paris as Ambassador to France.) Because of so much popular opposition to this original version of the constitution, these early plunderers of the new continent known reverently today as "our Founding Fathers" were forced to add the Bill of Rights amendments to get it passed by the majority of states. Jefferson returned during this period and was instrumental in formulating the amendments.
However, the rights under these amendments have largely been ignored and were never taken seriously by the ruling capitalist class. Only seven years after the adoption of the Constitution with the Bill of Rights, the Sedition Act of 1798 (see this and this) was passed by the Federalists which stated the following:
To write, print, utter or publish, or cause it to be done, or assist in it, any false, scandalous, and malicious writing against the government of the United States, or either House of Congress, or the President, with intent to defame, or bring either into contempt or disrepute, or to excite against either the hatred of the people of the United States, or to stir up sedition, or to excite unlawful combinations against the government, or to resist it, or to aid or encourage hostile designs of foreign nations.Incidentally--or maybe not--after the success of the War of Independence from Britain, the governing elite severely criticized Paine's democratic views, and he died in obscurity and virtually penniless.
After the war the new Constitution was rammed through a convention that had been billed as a meeting where modifications to the Articles of Confederation were to be discussed. As Charles Beard, the noted historian and political scientist of the early 20th century wrote in his seminal work, An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution:
Instead of being a document drawn up by patriotic men for the protection of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, the Constitution was the work of consolidated economic groups--...property interests....Having laid the ground rules to insure the priority of property rights which would be enforced by the new national army, they revealed the true character of their class by running a scam at the expense of those who fought this war.
During the war the soldiers, which consisted of mostly farmers and working people (as usual) led by members of the local elites, fought the war against the British. It was a grueling war: many defeats were suffered at the hands of the British, long imprisonments in terrible conditions, and soldiers endured long delays in receiving their pay which also caused hardships for their families. Then when they were paid, they were usually paid in paper script issued either by their respective States or the Confederation government. This money depreciated dramatically over time to where it was worth less than 20% of its nominal value and as low as 5%. After the war was over, Hamilton and his capitalist friends quietly went about buying up all this script at their market value. Then after the Constitution was rammed through, they made sure that the new government assumed all of the debts for this old money and other war debts at their face value! (See the above book for more details and also Beard's book entitled, Economic Origins of Jeffersonian Democracy.) (Note: this period is the origin of the phrase "I don't give a continental". It was frequently used many years after this war, but is now archaic.)
Another lie we were taught in school is that "our Founding Fathers" created in the Constitution a government with three branches (a so-called system of "checks and balances") to impede the development of authoritarian rule, but the truth is that it was structured this way to serve as a bulwark against democratic influences from below: they were profoundly fearful of the town meetings and other popular assemblies that were being held in many states.
