I am
convinced that most people want to do well, be well, and be thought well of. Unless they feel powerless by past experience
of personal failure(s) and have become inured (dictionary definition: ‘to accustom
to accept something undesirable’), hope does spring eternal. It is fostered by encouragement and given
life by example of those who seem to know what they are talking about. Heroes, celebrities or highly accomplished
individuals seem to be walking testimonials that motivate one so lacking to
action.
Hence,
people seem to be drawn to advice columns in newspapers, are persuaded by ‘testimonials’
in advertisements—especially by famous people, and listen to those who otherwise
seem credible. This is why ‘quote books’
perpetually seem to sell, as do birthday cards, and medicinal remedies, and why
people attend lectures. And it is why
this author gives as much advice through weblog posting as he does.
Advice is
sought and consent to follow the advice is sometimes followed.
Interestingly
the term ‘advice and consent’ is
found in The United States Constitution regarding the Senate’s role in
ratifying treaties and appointments. The
assumption is that those giving ‘advice’ are also better qualified to ‘consent’
to an action that is proposed—or at least that a body of democratically elected
representatives of the people should be heard and have at least as much power
as the executive proposing the matter.
I find it
interesting that in the British Parliament bills are given the following
heading: “BE IT ENACTED by the Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the
advice and consent of the Lords Spiritual and Temporal, and Commons, in this present Parliament assembled, and by the authority of
the same, as follows:”
I don’t think it would hurt if our political leaders considered the ‘advice’
of the equivalent of ‘Lord’s spiritual’ in the weighty challenges facing our
nation.
I find it revealing that the sitting President of the United States (as
witnessed by the ‘State of the Union’ address earlier this week) showed
precious little consideration for the principles of the construction of our
government—its checks and balances--by his assertive stance on taking
unilateral ‘executive action’ on any number of issues he feels are not going
his way. He certainly does not seem to
want ‘advice’ by Congress or the American people or our nation’s ‘spiritual
leaders’ (check his current polling ratings).
Not all of our former presidents were so cavalier.
I seem to remember our founding documents expressing the notion of “we
the people” instead of “I the President.”
A word count in the President’s addresses of “I” and “my” as contrasted
to “we and our” would also be revealing.