Review: We the Fallen People

We the Fallen People, Robert Tracy McKenzie. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2021.

Summary: An argument that we have witnessed a great reversal in American history from an assumption of fallen human nature to the inherent goodness of people, which the author believes could jeopardize its future.

“America is great, because America is good.” Have you heard that phrase? Likely, it was attributed to writer on American democracy, Alexis de Tocqueville. Except that Tocqueville never said it. Rather, he said, “I cannot regard you as a virtuous people.” And his two volume work, which many believe to be a paean of praise to American democracy is in fact much more guarded in its appraisal according to Robert Tracy McKenzie. He contends, along with Tocqueville himself, that this work is often misunderstood, if it has been read.

While there is a good amount of material about Tocqueville here, the real concern of this book is about a Great Reversal that occurred in American history concerning American goodness. He begins with the Founders and the writing of the Constitution. The young nation just wasn’t working. Dependence upon the good will of the states to contribute to the upkeep of a national government just wasn’t happening and the national government had no way to compel it. They were depending on virtuous behavior and it was not forthcoming.

In writing the Constitution, the framers started from a different premise, “taking human nature as they found it.” In biblical terms, they assumed a fallen people. On one hand, they created a federal government with a strong executive office to implement the laws passed by Congress. Congress had two houses, one that represented local interests, and one representing broader concerns to balance each other. They could override the executive’s veto. At the same time a third branch, the judiciary, could check laws that overreached the power of the Constitution. It both guarded against excessive influence of popular power, and any concentration of power within the government. They wouldn’t trust anyone too far. They assumed human fallibility and fallenness.

McKenzie proposes that a Great Reversal occurred with the election of Andrew Jackson, who presented himself as the people’s president. He represented himself singularly as the people’s representative. He described his victory as “a triumph of the virtue of the people.” The great reversal in all of this was a growing belief in the inherent goodness of the American people, and those they elect, an assumption that has continued to the present day. Accruing great power to himself, he encouraged the abrogation of treaties with the Cherokee people and their removal via the Trail of Tears to Oklahoma. In a lesser discussed move, he worked to end the second Bank of the United States. Tracy sees in this Jackson’s use of populism, the People versus the Monster, although the Bank had engaged in no wrongdoing. It is this extension of the power of democratic majorities, a “we versus them,” where “they” are not worthy, that is deeply disturbing. Democracy provides no protection from abuse of power when unchecked by the structures and the underlying premises behind those structures conceived by the founders.

It was this that was Tocqueville’s concern, writing during this period. Tocqueville witnessed the rise of partisan politics in which Congress failed to check Jackson’s moves, nor did the judiciary. While he recognized the great energy and productivity of the country, and the breadth of freedom its white male citizens enjoyed–greater than in Europe–he also recognized how democracies could be turned to ill, depending on how majorities wielded their power. He recognized how people could exchange liberty and justice for safety.

At the same time, Tocqueville finds that it is not virtue but self-interest that can be a safeguard–the temporary denial of benefit for long term profit that produces a kind of discipline, and counters individualism with collaboration on shared self-interests like good roads. Tocqueville also believed religious piety of importance, not because of his religious views, but as an early sociologist and political thinker. Belief in an afterlife in which one gives account can serve as a partial, not total, restraint on egregious evil. Tocqueville saw the separation of church and state as a good thing, recognizing the loss of spiritual force churches experienced when intertwined with political power.

All of this challenges the rhetoric of American goodness and greatness. McKenzie believes there can be great danger in being blind to human depravity, whereas the recognition of this gives reason for the countervailing powers of government and punctures the pretensions of political leaders. In his concluding chapter, he not only applies this to our current political scene, but if anything, even more forcefully speaks to his concerns for the ways the church has allied itself with political power.

This also explains to me the efforts to sanitize the teaching of American history, expunging our sorry dealings with native peoples, our involvement with slavery from our earliest settlements, and the structures that continued to oppress blacks, other minorities, and women even after Emancipation. None of these things ought surprise those of us who believe in human fallenness, who also believe in the biblical remedies of repentance, just restitution, and reconciliation. But those who must hold onto the myth of our inherent goodness cannot admit these things–the only solution is suppression–a strategy that has been a heavy burden on our nation

This is a vitally important book for our time. It not only takes a deep dive into the Great Reversal of the Jackson presidency but also uses Tocqueville to challenge the stories we tell about ourselves. It calls us to be clear-eyed about the future of our democracy, and questions the naïve notion of our inherent goodness. Perhaps a severe mercy of the pandemic is that it has challenged such illusions. But do we still hide behind them by attributing wickedness to “them”? Or will we learn from Samuel Thompson, a Massachusetts delegate in a ratification convention in 1788, to whom McKenzie introduces us. He declared, “I extremely doubt the infallibility of human nature” and gave for the basis of his doubt “Sir, I suspect my own heart, and I shall suspect our rulers.” Will we suspect our own hearts and put our trust not in rulers but in the God who searches hearts?

________________________________

Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary review copy of this book from the publisher. The opinions I have expressed are my own.

Review: John Quincy Adams

John Quincy Adams
John Quincy Adams by Harlow Giles Unger
My rating: 5 of 5 stars

William Wilberforce has always been a “hero” in politics for me. His determined and principled opposition to slavery over forty years led to its abolition in the British Empire. In reading this biography of John Quincy Adams, I discovered that he (along with Lincoln and some others) is a candidate for America’s Wilberforce.

In recent years, he has often been overshadowed by his father, but it can be argued that his contribution to the early history of our country might rival that of his father, even though both were ineffective Presidents (perhaps for some of the same reasons).

As a boy, he watched the Battle of Bunker Hill from across the bay in Quincy. He sailed to France with his father who served as our first ambassador to France, pursued by British warships, who if successful would have hanged the father and impressed the son. Associating with Franklin, Jefferson, and leading figures from many European countries, he quickly learned the ways of diplomacy.

After Harvard, and his defense of the Washington administration against the likes of Citizen Genet, he was named to a post in Holland, a crossroads “listening post” for Europe. Subsequently, he was named to a post in St Petersburg as America’s first ambassador to Russia. He made key trade deals that greatly facilitated America’s economic future. Under Madison, he was instrumental in negotiating an end of hostilities in the War of 1812. Then under James Monroe, he served as Secretary of State, the stepping stone to the Presidency in those days. He formulated the policy that became known as the Monroe Doctrine, asserting US opposition to any further colonization of the Americas.

Daguerrotype of John Quincy Adams, first former president to be photographed.

Daguerrotype of John Quincy Adams, first former president to be photographed.

He did not run for President. He allowed his name to be put forward, but not at the head of any party (a practice he adhered to for the rest of his life). Nor did he campaign for office, opposed as he was by the likes of Andrew Jackson and Henry Clay. Jackson actually won a plurality of both the popular and electoral votes but not a sufficient number, setting the stage for the “Corrupt Bargain”, a conversation between Adams and Clay where no quid pro quo was stated but the result of which was that Clay directed his electors to Adams and Adams made him Secretary of State. Much like our current situation, Adams was able to do little, a victim of Congressional gridlock as Jackson mobilized opposition to all of Adams policies. Adams didn’t help matters by refusing to respond in kind and by elevated language in speeches that alienated him from all but the elite. It seems that he inherited qualities from his father that rendered him ineffective in this regard. Needless to say, Jackson soundly defeated him in the next election.

He was perhaps the first ex-President to distinquish himself for his post-Presidential work. He was elected to the House of Representatives where he served until the day of his death, collapsing in the House chambers and expiring on the premises. He fought vociferously to abolish the Gag Rule that prevented debate or even citizen petitions to introduce the topic of the limitation or abolition of slavery. He resisted efforts at expulsion and was the first congressional voice to speak against this practice, working with a young Abraham Lincoln. Indeed, one of his speeches clearly anticipates Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation.

Unger covers all this history in a readable style free of dense academic prose and of reasonable length (364 pages with notes, bibliography, and indexes). I would highly recommend this if you would like to discover this lesser known but important figure in American history.

View all my reviews