Carl Hitchens - tracking the self …
Carl Hitchens - tracking the self …
2011
Acting with sense and sensibility toward the common good of all beings, would that not be the best precept for personal and national self-governance? Would that not be the consummate cornerstone of ideal government?
Separation of Church and State, implied or not in our Constitution, makes perfect sense does it not? How else can you guarantee freedom of religion/belief other than disallowing any religion or belief to dominate public policy over all others? On the other hand, if the goal is to have State by Religion: one state, one religion, then you will have a whole different concept of government than the one established for the United States.
This notion of personal vs. national self-governance is reflected in the division of states forming our united states of America. States have a certain autonomy to govern themselves based on their unique geographical and societal circumstances, respective of the needs of the nation as a whole. If the whole nation, in order to provide equal education of its citizens, for example, requires non-segregated schools, then federal regulations supporting this trump state regulations against it.
The beauty of this is its simplicity. Where it gets complicated is where people get selective about what part of national or state self-governance conflicts with personal self-governance. The idea of responsive government is strongly equated with "personal" need. How self-serving is government becomes the primary test for good government: Is the self the federal government-self, the state government-self, or the individual-self? That's where it gets complicated, and, these days, down right crazy. Everyone seems to get that the Constitution is about individual rights. They don't often seem to appreciate that it is also about the collective rights of the aggregate union that is the U.S.A. It is by addressing the collective need of the American people—not in some rhetorical way for solitary self-serving benefit, but with genuine consideration for all selves—that we can have responsive personal interactions leading to responsive government interactions.
We are the government, are we not? If we find at any time that we are not, we are supposed to be in the streets. The trick is to make sure that the WE that we are is also the US.
Responsive Government
10/11/11