blog 5

There were many issues that the founding fathers had to wrestle with, before they finalized the constitution. They had to decide which government form to chose, how to use it, what powers to give it, what powers the states would retain, etc. These issues were complicated a lot by the recent enlightenment in Europe, with which the founding fathers were intimately familiar. There were a great amount of enlightenment proposals on how government should work. The founding fathers were familiar with Locke, who proposed natural rights, as we have seen in the declaration of independence which almost exactly quoted locke, the only variation being the change from the pursuit of property to the pursuit of happiness. Having already established that there were some universal rights, and that the purpose of government was to protect these natural and universal rights, the founding fathers were now left to choose what government system could best protect the rights of the people. There were many forms of government to choose from, and all of them had advantages and the founding fathers knew this. the first attempt at governing the united states the articles of confederation was not a good government system. The government under the articles of confederation was incredibly weak, it had no power to tax, it could not print money, it did not establish a national army, and it could not pass resolutions without unanimous vote, essentially the states were independent nations bound by an alliance. The founding fathers saw that this did not work, and thus were more inclined to have a central government with real authority, however some were inclined to go back to a monarchy, pr similar institution, because they believed that since the articles of confederation had not worked democracy could not work with all of the states. This was of course not a very popular option among the founding fathers, given their recent expierience with the abuse of power in the British monarchy. Of course democracy had it's defenders as well, however the support for general direct democracy was greatly decreased by shay's rebellion. which showed the americans just how dangerous mobs could be. The exclusion of the two extremes still left a plethora of government systems many of which were theoretical, and untried. The founding fathers chose to develop a new system of their own, one that would protect the rights of the people, but also prevent the mob rule, and anarchy that the articles of confederation allowed. Unfortuneately, as the founding fathers knew, governments tended to become corrupt. Any existing government system, even most of the theoritical ones, no matter how good it started would eventually deteriorate into anarchy or tryranny. Therefore if the founding fathers wanted to make a lasting government they would have to prevent this from happening, by allowing the government to be flexible to meet the new challenges, thus preventing anarchy. They would also have to have a system to ensure that the government could not easily become corrupted. This was what led to the system of checks and balances, which made sure that no one person had all the power in the government, and that all of the branches of government had ways to prevent the others from unrighteously excercising their authority. Furthermore the founding fathers left much of the power traditionally laying with central governments with the state governments, which could if the situation dictated, join against the central government to prevent the federal government from abusing its power. Clearly the founding fathers had a lot to think about when framing the constitution, and if I may say so, they did an excellent job with it, although it seems we disregard their laws quite a bit.

Blog number 4

The John Adams Movie was actually pretty good, I liked it, it was pretty realistic, and in general really good. However I was expecting more brilliant orration from John Adams, according to the paper we read he spoke for two hours, the movie was not even that long, and lots of it was focused elsewhere. I understand that they couldn't show a full two hours of John Adams talking, but it didn't seem like they even tried to give the impression that he spoke for two hours, at a time. The dialogue of the congress in the movie seemed to be primarily one-liners designed to insult the other members of the congress, and while it is more entertaining than long monologues, it doesn't give an accurate impression of the continental congress at all. I really think they should have had more of John Adams speaking about independence, in the congress. I think that the best scene involving the congress was when Mr. Dickinson had his long monologue before leaving the congress, intentionally allowing the Declaration of Independence to be ratified in his absence. The bad dialogue at congress is my only serious compaint though, the rest of the movie seemed excellent. The dialogue at home was pretty good, and it seemed like the characters actually cared about what was going on. The scene with the cannon going past the Adams' house was pretty good even though it was completely made up. It showed how much some of the colonists were worried about the british when Mrs. Adams grabbed her husbands gun and powder horn at the sound of an approaching army. I also liked the scene at home where the children were molding musket balls, as far as I know this is pretty accurate historically, and in the movie it showed the children's support of the revolution, and their father. The scene with the letters was just weird, but it did show Mrs. Adams love of her husband, and his love for her. I also liked the scene with the smallpox vaccination, it was pretty realistic, and seemingly accurate, it also shows what smallpox was like, and helps the audience better understand its threat to people. It also is a good intro to the scene with Adams' daughter sick, because it shows what can happen to one who becomes seriously infected with the pox. My favorite scene in the movie was the scene after the battles of Lexington and Concord, when Adams rides to the scene, and finds the battle over. It is an accurate depiction of the situation after a battle, the wounded and the dying are screaming, and so are their friends and family, it's a powerful scene and I really liked it. The scene also seems to show that Adams' place is not as a soldier, as if his lack of military service needed justification. I also like the scene shortly after the battle of bunker hill, when the wounded are carried past the Adams' house, it also shows the suffering of the soldiers, which was great, and shows that well known people were dying, not just obscure seperatists. All in all the movie was pretty well done.

Blog#3

to be Honest I don't really like art, and going to an art museum is not my idea of a fun activity. But I suppose that the types and shadows exhibit was pretty nice, although I still felt very uneasy in the art museum. I liked one of the first pieces, the scuplturey one, to me it looked a lot like the figure on the right side was throwing out some means of support to the left side figure which appeared to be falling. I guess it was really well done, but I have no idea because I don't study art. I also liked the picture of the Prodigal son, it is one of my favorite parables. It is interesting how the picture shows the father coming down the stairs to meet his son, I think it shows that Christ had to come down from heaven to help us, so I guess that makes it a good type/shadow. The clothe piece with the bread was a bit weird, but it was pretty cool looking. The picture of the glass was not very expressive to me, but it was still a very good painting. the painting of the food on the table was very interesting, it seems to show the restoritive power of the atonement. the food on one side seems rotted and and useless, while on the other side it is full of life and color. It seems to emphasize the fact that with out the atonement life is pretty meaningless, but with it life is there, and meaningful. The picture of Job seems to be a great depiction of how christ's life was. Job, sick and dying, praises the lord, while his healthy friends are praying, but telling him that he has done some wrong to become sick. Similarly christ was accused of sinning by the pharisees, who acted righteous, but were not, and in fact helped to cause christ's suffering. The picture of the mountain at the beggining of the exhibit was pretty amazing, and I have always liked mountains. Mountains symbolize temples, which are great. They are also great because they symbolize grandeur, and glory, as well as constants (although they aren't really permanent). They also show the grandeur of christs creations, and sometimes make me feel insignificant. Mountains are also great for defensive ground, which brings to my mind helaman 5:12 which is about being built upon the rock of the redeemer, who is christ, so that when the devil comes against you you can resist him.

The meaning of the title "the revolution of sober expectations" is that the american revolution was a revolution bounded by reality. The founding fathers did not hope to create a Utopian society that would exist forever. The founding fathers therefore placed limitations on their revolution, to prevent anarchy. Of course as the article states this did not develop overnight, it came in two segments, the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution. The declaration of Independence is most surely a sober document, it does not even propose a plan for a coloial government, which surely reflects the reality that the revolution could fail, and that even if it succeeded there was no sure way to govern it and ensure its existence. Furthermore the declaration, anticipating the intervention of other nations, clearly outlined the causes of the break with england, this would allow other nations to support the U.S.' cause with a clear conscience. The founding fathers realized the political necessity of this. The second part of the revolution came several years after the first. The first attempt at government, the articles of confederation, had failed. The government established under it lacked any real power, and thus could not stand, the founding fathers realized this, and set out to establish a new government. The debate to establish the constitution was necessary, and the founding fathers realized this too, and allowed it to continue until they had a workable document. This to shows that the revolution was one of sober expectations, the founding fathers did not expect to produce a document that would satisfy everyone and solve all their problems, they knew they would need to compromise, and thus they had one of the greatest debates of history. It is important to note that even through this great debate the founding fathers were unable to completely deal with the question of slavery, they realized this and did not try to go beyond their limits. The document they produced was also an excellent compromise. It had the bill of rights, which was what many of the states were holding out for. But it also provided for a much more powerful government. Of course the founding fathers realized that any government could become corrupt, so they provided for a series of checks and balances. This ensured that if one branch of the government became corrupt it would not be able to unjustly excercise its power, but instead be stopped by the other two. this shows that the founding fathers knew that men would become corrupt and try to seek power, having seen this in their day. it was a reflection of their knowledge of reality that they did this. They also input safeties to prevent mob rule, such as the electoral college. This shows that they were mindful of the possibility of anarchy, which was the result of the French revolution, which had nothing to prevent mob rule, nor checks and balances to prevent Napoleon from becoming emperor. Clearly the American Revolution was one bounded by reality, or in other terms one of sober expectations.