Ireland changed its constitution on May 22, 2015, after 62% of its electorate voted in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage. For what it's worth, I only remember the exact date because of this clip, where U2's performance of 'Desire' was prefaced by a reference to the constitutional referendum. The most remarkable part of that exchange is this analysis of the voting result - "Ireland didn't change [because of the vote]... but we did confirm a change that had already happened."
Is this what we mean when we talk about change? Just someone making a historian's job a little easier? I bring this up today because in the spirit of yesterday's post I went all the way back to 1776 and reviewed the most famous non-TOA piece of writing in July 4 history. As I read, I couldn't help but think back to this same idea, that the Declaration of Independence was hardly a revelation, or a transformation; it only confirmed a change that had already happened.
I don't mean to suggest such moments have no catalytic power. In fact, they are almost always a necessary step in the long process of change, either to lock in earlier gains or inspire a new group to join the movement. These moments are not limited to votes or written declarations, they also include forms such as protests, admissions, public reckonings, and more. Each manifestation is a little different, but at their cores they share an important quality - all point to the elephant in the room. And until someone points, people are pretty good at living their own lives without noticing what seems so obvious to everyone else.
Over these past few months, there has been a palpable sense of change. Moment after moment has strung together, each reinforcing a sensation that yesterday is being firmly locked into the past. But as I noted above, in these moments it's almost always a confirmation of something that has already changed. The elephant has been in the room, I suppose, and I think by now everyone has at least a sense of its form. But what exactly is everyone pointing at?
I think I finally figured it out, or at least figured out the best way to explain it, when I was reading the above declaration. Here's the relevant snippet:
"WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal..."
I think what's happened in 2020 is that people are looking at those words, taking a very serious moment to think about their meaning, and concluding in their own way that the elephant in the room is America's failure to live up to this promise, its own promise. Is everyone here equal? Is the truth of that self-evident? And when you consider those additional layers, the specific reference to men ('Men') or the fact that certain authors of the declaration were slaveholders, you start to get a sense that in some ways it was a false promise, a dream house built on a rotting foundation.
The uplifting aspect of rereading the declaration is the knowledge that we can always start afresh, using new words that suit our times and directing our energies to building a stronger society and a better future. It's never too late to fulfill a promise. We can take some hints from 1776, perhaps using its general spirit to point the way. But it's clear to me now that if we are going to ever live up to the idea of equality, we'll have to chart a different path, starting with our own declaration of independence from the loyalties and tyrannies of yesterday so that we can continue building a better tomorrow, today.
