THE GREAT NATION OF FUTURITY
Writing the social transformations that resulted from the American Revolution was one of O’ Sullivan’s key objectives. Although a good constitution was key a component to ultimate democracy, a radically new system that did not resemble the shackles of the traditional European civilizations was needed to spearhead in attaining the long awaited change. The millions of people would ultimately shape America’s future by lobbying for a constitution that advocated for democracy. Unlike other historians, O’ Sullivan strongly believed that unity of many Republicans was key in attaining historical change and not just the governmental actions.
The essay "The Great Nation of Futurity" by John L. O'Sullivan. It was composed in 1839 during the time frame when the nation was contemplating expanding its territory by conquering new frontiers. O'Sullivan argues that a country's destiny depends more on the principles that are set to govern it and less on its history. He urges his countrymen to follow the Constitution and the spirit behind its law while forgetting the past and all its lessons.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
O'Sullivan rallies people together around religion, while paying a keen attention on their history. O'Sullivan's argument is tainted by his optimism. Although the Constitution is a well-written document that its people should be proud of, it is not the only benchmark with which to measure progress. First of all, a nation's greatness must be equal to its democracy. Democratic equality in any government is the foundation for peace. When all members of the society can agree to disagree, then the nation is better placed to move on together. O'Sullivan's argument does not address the historical injustices that have taken place as a result of poor democratic practices. Any nation where these issues are not addressed ends up in anarchy due to an uprising from the aggrieved party. The idea that atrocities caused by past monarchies and biased battles should be forgotten is unreasonable. Democracy cannot be accomplished without repairing the damage caused. This is regardless of how much religion may be used to justify any action and to coerce people into action.
O'Sullivan talks of "a clear conscience sullied by the past "though this is an unrealistic stand. The past cannot be erased just because it makes us uncomfortable. We must examine the past and address it for the future to be stable. O'Sullivan would prefer to build a new nation on the rubble of antiquity, instead of slowly sorting out the rubble and recreating a new foundation of inclusivity. To form a new nation that will last, we must acknowledge the strengths of past practices and embrace lessons from our from our forefathers. This is where the significance of history lies. We need to embrace our history so that we can learn from it. O'Sullivan's argument cannot be wholly owned because it downplays the significance of history. Equality is also understated by O'Sullivan. He acknowledges that there was inequality when he talks about "God's natural and moral law of equality. “However, the constitution that he wishes the people to follow and live by does not outline ways to ensure and litigate equality. This is why the nation must use something other than the constitution to rewrite their story.
O'Sullivan's article is right to be titled "the great nation of Futurity" because it is more of a wish list than it is a clear action plan. He describes how he would wish for individual and universal freedom, but he does not outline how they can be accomplished. He hopes that this great nation can quash the tyranny of past leaders, but he doesn't point out how the constitution supports this. Based on the findings above, we can conclude that a nation cannot be built on principles alone. It must be built on inclusion, equality, democracy, and unification of purpose. The only way everyone can embrace religion is if it brings people together. Once all are united by a common purpose, then the nation can consider acquiring new territories and moving forward in true unity. This approach would have been most realistic given that the nation was in its initial stages of uniting and forming states that were to have a common purpose.
References
O’Sullivan, J. L. (1839). The great nation of futurity. The United States Democratic Review, 6(23), 426-430.
