Relevance in the Modern World

I've heard the argument once in awhile that the Constitution as written has little or no relevance in the modern age. This often is the preface for an explanation of why it must be interpreted, massaged and sometimes flat-out rewritten to meet the needs of modern society. I have personally never agreed with this statement. I'm not alone. Take into account the words in a recent editorial by Joseph Sobran:

"When the U.S. Constitution was written, Yale and Harvard were still little Christian colleges, not yet big universities; Benjamin Franklin was puttering with electricity, which nobody foresaw would transform home life, communication, and everything else; air travel was hardly even a dream; modern weapons of mass murder weren't even imagined; and the first version of King Kong hadn't yet been filmed. How could this quaint document have relevance to our world today? A fair question. Without treating it as Holy Writ, we can recognize that it embodied a sound principle: the division of power. Like an even older and quainter document, the Magna Carta, its distant ancestor, it recognized the danger of concentrating arbitrary power in the hands of too few men, especially one man. The narrow specifics differ, which is why each generation's passions sound quaint to the next; but the principle is always the same."

That covers the history end of it better than I could. I'd also ask that you consider this. The rights and delegated powers enumerated in that document were not thrown in on a whim. This was not a narrative pieced together in a weekend and it was not just a bunch of old white merchantilists making sure they were taken care of in the new political order. This was a collection of some of the finest men of their day, inspired by even finer men of the Age of Enlightment like Burke and Rousseau. They labored and debated over the need to even create such a document, even in light of the failure of the Articles of Confederation to accurately govern. This was no fly-by-night operation.

The Federalist was written mostly to explain why and how a Constitution should function and the Bill of Rights was added to ensure that this new government did not do the very thing our government currently does, overstep its intended authority. All governments stretch their authority based on the principle that they do it for the good of their people. If not us, who? If not the government indeed. Government always tries to be our master. It is the people who must keep it subservient and the people who must fight to retain their inalienable rights. It is not the authority of the government to usurp small governments or the individual. This idea is as fresh now as it was in the Eighteenth Century.

Are the Constitution and the musings of political men long dead still valid today? I say more than ever. We discount them at our peril and to the advantage of those who would wrap us in chains; bureaucratic, statutory, philosophical or metal. They all bind the same. When someone tells you it's not relevant, ask them what their stake in it is. Ask them why they so desparately need to discount it. The answer, I'm sure, will not come easy or truthfully in most cases. That's why the Constitution is relevant. It's your armor and your sword against foes such as that.