I wrote the article on the Articles of Confederation for Milestone Documents in American History, and I can tell you that it changed my perspective on things.

Quick history lesson. We are told that the United States is a democracy, yet we live in a republic. The Greeks invented democracy, and the Romans the republic. Who ran the Roman Republic? The Senate, of course. And who made up the Senate? The patricians–that is, the upper class. They saw themselves as better than everyone else, i.e. the plebeians. Everyone could vote for senators, but only the patricians could run for the Senate. The Senate continued to run things. Finally, the plebeians rose up and, through what is called the “Struggle of the Orders,” got some of the power.

We do live in a republic. When doing research for the Articles, I was astonished to find that the founders of the country did not want a democracy; they feared what many called “mob rule.” When the Articles were accepted by the Second Continental Congress on November 15, 1777, many of the state legislatures had been taken over by the “common” people. In order to protect their class and their property, the founders set up a federal government closer to an oligarchy than a democracy. The Constitution, which replaced the Articles when it was adopted by Congress in 1787, strengthened the federal government, which was viewed as the “check” on the ultra-liberal state legislatures and the people.

Look at the Constitution. The restrictions on the legislature goes on and on; there are few articles for the executive and judicial branches because the legislature was viewed as the central branch of government and therefore had to have limitations put upon it. We have a Senate where our senators serve six-year terms. In the House of Representatives, which is viewed as the “lower” house, representatives serve two-year terms. The House is the only part of the government that is democratic, since the number of representatives is proportionate to the population. Originally, senators were appointed by the state legislatures–a concession given to the states that allowed them some input into the new federal government. The Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution changed this, electing senators by popular vote.

Why do senators serve six years but representatives only two? Why does the Senate have broad powers over foreign affairs? Why are Supreme Court justices appointed for life? Why are Supreme Court justices appointed and not elected? There are 12 federal district courts in the United States. Why not have 12 Supreme Court justices, one elected from each district with one appointed to be the Chief Justice? Can we elect Supreme Court justices to serve a finite number of years?

During the last eight years, the executive branch has abused the Constitution. Appointments to the Supreme Court have become a game; it’s not who is best for the job but who is the most politically acceptable. The Congress and Supreme Court allowed the executive branch to do what it liked. Things need to change. We need to start amending the Constitution and making changes, because the system hasn’t been working.

In defense of the founders, they were not rich like people today. Washington, Jefferson, et al. did not have millions of dollars, although they did own land, estates, slaves, and so forth. Even John Adams, who was a firm believer in independence, did not believe in overturning the economic system; protection from “mob rule” was needed. By today’s standards, these men were not rich. In their time, they were the upper class, but even then they had to borrow money from time to time. For example, Washington borrowed money to run Mount Vernon until after his harvest came in. There was no big divide between rich and poor like there is today.

The founders also had a sense of noblesse oblige, the idea that, as the “betters” in society, they had an obligation to that society to serve it in some way. Serving in government was a way for the untitled aristocrats in America to not only serve society but also to try and better it. The term noblesse oblige was later characterized negatively as the nineteenth century progressed until its original meaning became distorted.

This elite of old are no longer in control of the government. I know of no descendants of the founders who are in national politics. The new elites that have come to power have run this country into the ground, of which the present economic downturn is a symptom. Noblesse oblige is a foreign concept to these people, who only view serving in government as a way to “fix” things for their friends in big business so that they can do what they want. There is no interest in bettering society for anyone. They are concerned only with what is in their own interests and those interests of their rich friends.

Things have to change. The incoming administration will represent the first, positive step this country has taken in a long time. However, it is going to take a long time to undo the damage that has been done.

Michael W. Handis is head of collection management at the Mina Rees Library, the Graduate Center, City University of New York.

See also: Doc of the Day: The Articles of Confederation