The uninterrupted democracies that I can think of are Britain, the US, Australia and Canada. The most striking thing these countries have in common is England and an Anglo-Saxon-protestant heritage. From the Instrument of Government, penned in 1653 by Cromwell and his council of officers after the Glorious Revolution, sprang an English constitutional heritage that was the source of the charge against King George in the Declaration of Independence; “taking away our charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments” (American Historical Documents. 152. Harvard Classics, 1969). The American colonists and revolutionaries all speak in their writings of the rights and constitution of Englishmen that had been established for generations. “But the Americans were a high-spirited people who claimed all the rights for which Englishmen had fought since the Magna Charta, and would settle for nothing less. Make no mistake; the American Revolution was not fought to obtain freedom, but to preserve the freedom that the colonies already had” (A concise History of the American Republic. 62. Oxford, 1983. Morison, Commager, Leuchtenburg) There was not an official written British Constitution. So to what were they referring?
The majority of the issues of private citizens are not dealt with by the government; not for a lack of trying by the government, but because most problems people have cannot be adequately addressed by the government. We are given the right to gather and petition our Government by the Bill of Rights under the First Amendment. However, this process is controlled in large part by big business and special interest groups so that most common citizens cannot break into it and get the ear of their representative. The defense is often made that representatives couldn’t possibly hear from that many people. I agree and assert that there needs to be a centralized representation in greater proportion to our population closer to us. Most consider the rise of special interest groups counter intuitive to representative federalism but I believe there should only be concern for the manner in which these groups currently operate. The primary problem in our system, is the system itself; democratic federalism. We need to develop a system closer to that of democratic confederalism; smaller republics self-governed with a local centralized power in which these republics are loosely covenanted together for purposes of trade and defense.
In our era, sociologically, man destroyed the base which gave him the possibility of freedoms without chaos. Humanists have been determined to beat to death the knowledge of God and the knowledge that God has not been silent, but has spoken in the Bible and through Christ-and they have been determined to do this even though the death of values has come with the death of that knowledge.