This week, I thought I’d do another short book analysis series on Robert Tracy McKenzie’s new book, We the Fallen People. McKenzie is a Wheaton College professor, and one of my dad’s old friends from his own Wheaton College days helped McKenzie as he wrote the book. Long story short, my dad gave me a copy and wanted to know what I thought, so I read it and, voila, here we are! I imagine this will be a 2-3- part book analysis series, and, as with many of my other ones, I want to begin this series with a post in which I simply provide a summary of the book’s argument. So, let’s just jump right in!
What’s the Book About and What is its Argument?
One of the book’s endorsements comes from Mark Galli, the former editor of Christianity Today. In it, he says the following: “McKenzie convincingly argues that the health of a nation depends on its citizens’ ability to grasp an old, old idea, that of original sin. America’s founders believed it, but it’s the rare politician, pundit, or citizen who does today. This is a bracing call for Christians especially to reintroduce this idea into the national conversation and restore some sanity to our public life together.”
To make that argument, McKenzie focuses on two key points in American history. First, the Constitutional Convention in 1787, in which the Founding Fathers attempted to craft a new style of government for America, in light of the fact that the Articles of Confederation had proven to be a complete bust. Second, the presidency of Andrew Jackson, beginning with Jackson’s defeat in 1824, when John Quincy Adams made a deal with Henry Clay, resulting in Adams becoming President, Clay becoming the Secretary of State, and Jackson being left out in the cold, even though he had gotten more electoral votes than either Adams or Clay. Jackson subsequently won the presidency in 1828 and then got re-elected in 1832.
McKenzie focuses on these two events (the Constitutional Convention and Jackson’s Presidency) to highlight the radical shift that took place regarding America’s understanding of the role of government, and the very nature of human beings, not just those in power, but “the people” as a whole.
In a nutshell, McKenzie shows that the Founding Fathers sought to craft a government that took into consideration that human beings were not always virtuous. The Articles of Confederation relied on the hope that people would be virtuous and do what was best for the country—and they were a complete failure. Why? Because people, although not outright evil, are selfish creatures who lack virtue. At the same time, the Founding Fathers didn’t want an all-powerful government that could “keep those selfish creatures in line,” so to speak, because that would open the door to possible corruption and authoritarianism. Simply put, even though they were not all Christians, the Founding Fathers held a very Christian understanding of human nature, and they sought to craft a Constitution and government that took that into account.
With Andrew Jackson’s presidency, though, there was a considerable change in attitude. Namely, that the leaders in the government were corrupt, but the will of the people was virtuous and good. Thus, Jackson claimed to represent the will of the people (and the will of the people was virtuous and good), and that he was just the kind of guy who could go into Washington DC as an outside and clean out the corruption, or “drain the swamp,” so to speak.
On that note, chances are you have heard that phrase, “drain the swamp,” before, particularly coming from the previous presidential administration of Donald Trump. I don’t want to jump to the final conclusions of McKenzie just yet, but I will say that once you read the last chapter and how McKenzie sees the lessons of the Founding Fathers and Andrew Jackson being applied to today, it is quite clear he is not a fan of President Trump, just as it is clear he is not a fan of Andrew Jackson. More on that later.
Put all that together, the title of the book illustrates McKenzie’s overall point. The Framers of the Constitution were under no illusion—human beings are sinful and are thus “fallen.” They are not virtuous. The trick, therefore, was to craft a government that worked for the overall good of its citizens but didn’t bow to every whim and passion of its citizens, because, well, we are a fallen people. We are not always virtuous. With Andrew Jackson, though, the American mindset did, in fact, change, to the point where most of us today assume that “democracy” is innately a good thing, no matter what. We assume that as long as “the people” can vote, everything will always be just peachy! McKenzie calls that mindset one of democratic faith and a democratic gospel—and he says it is a very dangerous, and unchristian mindset to have.
On that, he’s right. To be clear, he’s obviously not saying that democracy is bad. He’s just saying there are clear dangers to democracy that can’t be ignored, and that it can easily morph into either anarchy or tyranny. We, therefore, should have the courage to critically analyze and think about our democracy, as well as ourselves as citizens.
Okay, Now for a Chapter-by-Chapter Flyover of the Book
McKenzie begins his book by alluding to the famous story of how Alexis de Tocqueville toured America in the 1820s and wrote Democracy in America, in which he said the famous line, “America is great, because America is good.” There is only one problem with that—he never said that! It was attributed to him by the speechwriters of Dwight Eisenhower in a speech he gave on November 3, 1952, and it has been repeated by countless politicians ever since. And why do politicians continue to say that? Because they want to appeal to voters and basically say, “You’re good! So, vote for me and I’ll do what you want!” It’s a slogan to get votes, and it’s very appealing because it maintains our “faith in democracy.” But that’s a problem, because, as McKenzie shows, it is a very dangerous thing to assume that people are “good” and that the “will of the people” is always virtuous.
Part One is entitled, “Governing a Fallen People,” and it focuses on the Founding Fathers at the Constitutional Convention, and how they sought to craft a government that wasn’t tyrannical but that also took human sinfulness and fallenness into account. In Chapter One, “Asking Different Questions,” McKenzie argues that the very reason the Founding Fathers got together to craft a new Constitution was precisely because, under the Articles of Confederation, it was abundantly clear that people weren’t virtuous. Simply put, they weren’t trying to “make America great again,” because under the Articles of Confederation, America wasn’t “doing so great” to begin with.
In Chapter Two, “We Must Take Human Nature as We Find It,” McKenzie discusses how the Founding Fathers did not consider voting to be a right, but rather a privilege that should be granted to those who would take the time to be informed and take the responsibility seriously. Simply put (and I think this is actually right), an uninformed and irresponsible voter is easily manipulated, and that isn’t good for the health of a democracy. As De Tocqueville said, “An idea that is clear and precise even though false will always have greater power in the world than an idea that is true but complex.” And uninformed and irresponsible voters will often be swayed by that simple, but false idea.
Also, McKenzie talks about how the Founders understood the role of the elected representatives: Should they act as agents of the people or trustees for the people? In other words, should representatives just go to DC to do whatever the “will of the people” is, or should the people put their trust in their elected representatives to do what they think is best for the people and the country? The Founders saw the role of representatives as being more trustees and less agents.
The bottom line in Part One is to highlight the Founder’s understanding of human nature. “Because none of us is naturally virtuous, because we’re all subject to the lure of self-interest, because each of us is vulnerable to the intoxication of power, power is always a threat to liberty” (68). Hence, the checks and balances in government (to guard against tyranny) and the idea of a republic/representative democracy (to guard against the “will of the people” leading to anarchy).
Part Two is entitled, “The Great Reversal,” and it focuses on the rise of Andrew Jackson. In Chapter 3, “The People Thought General Jackson Worthy,” McKenzie focuses on the election of 1824, and how Jackson felt he was cheated of the presidency by corrupt government elites (John Quincy Adams and Henry Clay). It was in reaction to 1824 that the Democratic Party was formed to help get Jackson elected in 1828. Incidentally, McKenzie points out that the Founding Fathers abhorred the idea of political parties and never envisioned any kind of “two party system.” In any case, it was Jackson who was the impetus for the formation of the Democratic Party and the push to view voting not merely as a privilege, but as a right to extend to more people. Granted, in 1828, that simply meant a larger portion of while male voters, but the point is that with Jackson, voting was becoming to be seen as a right, not a privilege.
In Chapter 4, “A Triumph of the Virtue of the People,” McKenzie focuses on the 1828 election—and boy, was it a doozy! Adams’ people accused Jackson of being not fit for office, of running off with a married woman, and of being the son of a prostitute who married a “mulatto man.” On top of that, Adams’ supporters mocked the stupidity and “deplorableness” of Jackson voters (sound familiar, anyone?). In turn, Jackson accused Adams of serving as a pimp for Czar Nicholas of Russia while Adams was ambassador to Russia. In short, Jackson proclaimed the virtue of the people and ultimately won the election. Still, due to what happened to him in 1824, Jackson wanted to get rid of the Electoral College.
Part Three is entitled, “Servitude or Liberty,” and it focuses on the actual presidency of Andrew Jackson. In Chapter 5, “By Permission of the Great Spirit Above, and the Voice of the People,” McKenzie talks about Jackson’s forcible removal of the Cherokee Nation. The long and short of it is that the Cherokees had actually assimilated quite a bit into the American way of life, and Jackson order them removed anyway. McKenzie points out, though, that we need to realize that the majority of Americans actually agreed with Jackson. As De Tocqueville pointed out, true democracy is one in which the majority rules. Of course, the danger of having a simple “majority rules” form of democracy is that, well, people aren’t always virtuous and can approve of doing really bad things!
In Chapter 6, “The People are Incapable of Protecting Themselves,” McKenzie focuses on Jackson’s war with the Bank of the United States, and his eventual dismantling it. In truth, Jackson pointed to the very real danger of that much power being in the hands of the government. Although McKenzie agrees on that point, he also points out that Congress formally censured Jackson for unilaterally ordering all government deposits to be taken out of the Bank of the United States and placed in other private banks. He also says that the real result of Jackson’s war with the Bank of the United States wasn’t that it really helped the average citizen, but that it enriched Jackson’s own friends and gave Jackson himself more power.
Part Four is entitled, “I Cannot Regard You as a Virtuous People,” and it focuses on De Tocqueville’s actual assessment of American Democracy. In Chapter 7, “Puncturing Faith in Democracy,” McKenzie focuses on De Tocqueville’s warnings about the dangers that democracy can bring. In short, it can bring about a kind of “soft tyranny,” where the voting public ends up voting for leaders who promise to protect them, in exchange for a slow, but steady relinquishing of our liberties.
In Chapter 8, “Nurturing Hope for Democracy,” McKenzie focuses on De Tocqueville’s hopes for democracy. Now, although it potentially can bring about great freedom for its citizens, De Tocqueville noticed back in the 1820s that the quality of elected leaders had declined tremendously since the time of the Founding Fathers. As the country divided into political parties, the more demagogues and loudmouths rose to positions of power. As McKenzie puts it, “The stature of American statesmen was shrinking at the same time that the country was becoming more democratic.” Nevertheless, democracy seemed to thrive in America, and De Tocqueville saw that it was in large part due to America’s religious freedom and the separation between Church and State. Back then, most clergy and pastors knew enough to stay out of the actual political sphere and to focus on the actual betterment of society—and that seemed to work!
Part Five is entitled, “Remembering, Reminding, Responding,” and it focuses on contemplating what the first eight chapters might mean for us today. In Chapter 9, “We the Fallen People: Renewing our Thinking,” McKenzie encourages us, specifically us Christians, to rethink our allegiance to that “democratic faith” and “democratic gospel” that tells us that the will of the people is always good and always virtuous. History shows that clearly isn’t always the case. Then, in Chapter 10, “We the Fallen People: Transforming Our Behavior,” McKenzie ends with (there’s really no other way to put it) unloading on Christians who voted for Donald Trump. I’ll expand and comment on McKenzie’s conclusions in the next couple posts, but for now, that is my attempt to provide a 2,300-word summary of the entire book!
My observations and analysis are coming in the next post or two.
