by Denimbeard

Democracy in America

I’m learning that I have much to learn regarding American history. Something that I cannot fathom is why our school classes were so boring and basic. In a matter of a dozen chapters from a single book published in 1835 I have a better understanding of not only our government, but a new sense of understanding leadership.

Considering the role of a leader in a way that, admittedly is arbitrary and far from unique, but as I understand it, leaders should be both seen and heard, while maintaining a unique level of distance. Close enough to understand the feeling and emotions of those following, but far enough to not feel as equals. Here, I see the fundamental issue of modern political structures in America. The falsehood that our elected leaders are anything of the sort undermines everything their leadership can stand for. As an example, how can one feel or expect Barack Obama to have a glimpse of what “normal” actually is?

How can it be that our culture has shifted from accepting a leadership role in government for the sake of national progress and fall into a state of political barrenness. Politics as a career cannot be accepted as a realistic goal if the state of our union is to develop further in a positive manner. How can we develop as a nation with pride, knowing that only a handful of reoccurring legal students (and eventual professionals) will absolutely dominate? At what point did the nation decide that the ethics and morals embedded in common law belongs exclusively to one group? Has this been part of the system since inception?

Is there a way to convince the scholarly to pursue a life that is dedicated to debate and standard within the public eye?