Grading the 1776 Report

I decided to treat the 1776 Commission Report as a gradable document. Yes, I have no life. If you want to suffer, you can find the report here. All quoted report text is from the report. It is unclear who wrote it. Constitution quotes are from the ACLU Pocket Constitution (Yes, I carry it. So?). 

 The Introduction 

 The first words in the report are,

 In the course of human events there have always been those who deny or reject human freedom, but Americans will never falter in defending the fundamental truths of human liberty proclaimed on July 4, 1776. We will—we must—always hold these truths. (1) 

 Whoever wrote this is obviously trying to refer and quote the Declaration which states with “when in the course of human events” (Archives). However, unlike Jefferson’s clear and concise argument, the point here is confused. This is what is commonly called filler text. Or Bullshit. It is what writers do when they have to reach a word count or page limit and can’t think of anything to say. You could have easily written, “In the course of human events, there have always been those who deny or reject dogs” and have the same weight. You will notice the at the Commission does not use the needed comma. Also, hold these truths how, where, in what manner? This is totally unclear. This is bad filler. (-5 points off) 

 The Commission then goes on to tell the reader why it was founded but none of the terms are defined. For instance, the Commission claims that a more Perfect Union will be formed by teaching history, a history of American principles it seems, that is “accurate, honest, unifying, inspiring, and ennobling.” (1). But it is unclear what honest, among other things, means here. Inspiring too is subjective as is enabling. And we can talk about how problematic accurate can be in regards to history. In other words, this is more filler and doesn’t really say anything. If you read old propaganda, especially from say Nazi Germany or Communist Russia, you find wording like this too. (-5 points) 

 The Commission than says that because facts are true (Strange, coming from a Commission set up by a president whose disregard for science led to the deaths of over 400,000 Americans) are we have to do is to look at facts to get the truth. The facts, it goes on to say, “Properly understood, these facts address the concerns and aspirations of Americans of all social classes, income levels, races and religions, regions and walks of life” (1). The implication that context is irrelevant to this commission is born out by the next paragraph that simply says to look at the documents without context. Context is important. Does anyone with a true grasp of history really think the Founder meant everyone as we define the word? If so, why did Abagail Adams write to her husband cautioning him against forgetting the women? Not that he listened. No effort is mad, either, to justify the removing of context as something to study. (Lack of argument development, simplification -10) 

 What then follows is the standard, well, pap about how America hasn’t always lived up to those ideals and yada, yada. There are several comma errors in these passages (-5)

 Part II 

 Oh joy, they are going to explain the Declaration of Independence. This is like when a student writes a paper that is simply a summery as opposed to a critical response isn’t it? 

 This is even a worse example of filler.  “The United States of America is in most respects a nation like any other. It embraces a people, who inhabit a territory, governed by laws administered by human beings” (2). 

 The implication of those statements is that there is at least one nation that is not governed by human beings. This might be cool, but nope. (-5)

 Then when talking about how the population of the US shares a common history, this phrase is used – “from carving communities out of a vast, untamed wilderness,” (2) and then later the US is different because of its birthday of July 4, 1776 (very few nations have birthdays apparently). What this does is totally and completely disregards the historically established fact of the Native American communities (who had Nations, cities, and communities) as well as the argument that Native American groups did manipulate the land in ways. (-20). 

 The Commission says that the US is unique because it applied the founding principles to all men. Which is strange and confusing because the Commission wants us to (a) take the Declaration literally and (b) take the Declaration as an all people encompassing documents. As a long a time reader of Tolkien, let me say, “I am no man” and so as the movie Bad Girls posits, “if your laws don’t apply to me because I am a woman, I don’t have to live by your laws). (-10) 

 If this section is about the Declaration of Independence why are you referring to the Federalist? And do you mean the website or do you mean the Federalist Papers? (-10 as it done more than once) 

 Mention of god as a justification for a non-religious argument (-10).

 The writers refer to truth and morality as being in nature given by God or eternal (which would imply a higher being). The Commission writes, “From the principle of equality, the requirement for consent naturally follows: if all men are equal, then none may by right rule another without his consent.” (4). As more than one critic has pointed out, this implies that slaves allowed themselves to be slaves, they really wanted it. (-20) 

 The Commission defines “all men created equal” as “that human beings are equal in the sense that they are not by nature divided into castes, with natural rulers and ruled” (4) as oppose to the traits that God and nature gifted people. Again that mention of God in a government document. Also considering who the Founders were and who they gave voting rights to, one must question the validity of the caste point. Also, I think Isabel Wilkerson would like a word. (-15) 

 Then there is this: The first was the sundering of civil from religious law with the advent and widespread adoption of Christianity. The second momentous change was the emergence of multiple denominations within Christianity that undid Christian unity and in turn greatly undermined political unity (6) First, this is a very wordy way to describe the Enlightenment. Second, Christianity did not lead to a split between Church and State. (-20)

 Section Three 

 Supposedly about the Constitution but more time spent on the Declaration. (-25)

 At this point, we are in negative grade territory so other problematic errors include: 

 The lumping together of Progressivism with Fascism and Slavery as equal treats to the country and people. 

 The suggestion that the US was the birthplace of the slavery abolition movement and that no one thought slavery was wrong until someone in the US did. 

The use of the term slave trade when only the International Slave Trade is meant.  The section on slavery implies that al slave trade was outlawed. This was far from the case. 

 The stating that the Civil Rights movement betrayed itself. 

 The idea that adults only speak out at wrong things, that a family is simply mother, father children as in this passage: 

   work, they learn the dignity of labor and the reward of self-discipline. When adults speak out against dangerous doctrines that threaten our freedoms and values, children learn the time-tested concept of free expression and the courageous spirit of American independence. When parents serve a neighbor in need, they model charity and prove that every human being has inherent worth. And when families pray together, they acknowledge together the providence of the Almighty God who gave them their sacred liberty (17) 

It is strange that a document hyping the Constitution blatantly disregards the First Amendment of that document. (-50) 

Grade is a negative (-) 110.