Skip to content
Subscribe

“We the People” vs “They the Not People”

“We the People” vs “They the Not People”
Published:

"Remember that the words 'political parties,' 'corporation' and 'company' are not even mentioned in our Constitution, raising the central question of why they are ruling 'we the people' today.”—Ralph Nader

“These people  do not own the land and for heaven’s sake, it’s very plain that the Army should not be using automatic weapons against we the people; that’s not part of our Constitution. It’s just unbelievable that this could be happening in America!”—Cliven Bundy

Whatever their differences, Ralph Nader and Cliven Bundy agree on at least this: America is being governed by entities that do not represent the interests of “We the People.”

There is a lot of this sentiment going around. “We the People” has become a sort of set phrase in our political discourse — a short hand way of referring to all of the people who should be running the country, but aren’t, and who should therefore get serious about taking it back.

It has never been entirely clear to me who "We the People" need to take our country back from, other than the usual suspects, of course, like corporate greed, political parties, trial lawyers, gun-control advocates, and the like. These, or at least some combination of them, are “They the Not People” —the ones who shouldn't have anything to do with running the country even though they control it in just about every way that matters.

That said, I have never heard the phrase “We the People” invoked in political discourse in a way that did not implicitly define somewhere close to half of the people in the country as “They the Not People.” Because, when you get right down to it, “We the People” is just another way to say “people who agree with me.”This happens pretty much across the political spectrum. We like to imagine, because it corresponds to our

partisan fantasies, that there really is a small group of “They the Not People” somewhere managing the events in the country in such a way that “We the People” don’t have a chance. We like to think that, once we subtract all of the greedy special interests, there will remain a definable majority of people who see things like we do.

But this is a fantasy too.

Everybody’s interests are special to somebody. Every pressure group, every political party, and every corporate PAC represent ideas that lots and lots of people in the country have. Yes, corporate lobbyists are against more taxes, but so are at least half of the people in the country. And sure most Hollywood stars want more gun control, but so do the other half.

In a nation as divided as ours, it makes no sense to imagine a stable-but-silent majority that could “take the country back” if only special interests could be defeated.

This notion goes hand-in-hand with another of our great fantasies: that governing a nation of 300 million people is easy. If we could just do one or two simple things, we could solve all our problems -- We can run "They the Not People" out of the country for good and return the government to "We the People" where it belongs.

In one of my favorite episodes of the original Star Trek series, the crew of the Enterprise discover a planet that (due to some Prime Directive monkey business by another ship) has evolved a deep reverence for America’s founding documents. The most sacred text in their culture is called the “E Plabneesta,” and only the holy men are allowed to know what it says.

E Plabneesta, of course, is a corruption of “We the People.” And the point of the episode (and when was Star Trek ever subtle?) is that, when the words of the Constitution become mere set phrases, it ceases to be a governing document and becomes simply a repository for our feelings of reverence.

We aren’t there yet.

“We the People” has not quite become “E Plabneesta.” But it’s close. It has become a set phrase that we invoke with no real understanding of what it once meant. It has become a way of delegitimizing people who disagree with us by suggesting that they are not actually people. And it has become the primary way that we try to fool ourselves into believing that the government that we have is something other than the government we deserve.

Adhere to the IVN etiquette

By posting a comment, you agree to adhere to our etiquette rules: No partisan attacks, no personal attacks, substantiate your sources, no self-promotion.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Contact IVN

Questions about this article or our coverage? Send us a message. A free IVN member account is required.

Message sent

Thanks, we’ll review it and get back to you if needed.

Message not sent

Sorry, something went wrong. Please try again.

Sign in to send a message

Messages are tied to your IVN member account. Signing in is free and takes a few seconds.

Republish this article

Republishing guidelines

Republish IVN articles for free. Independent Voter News articles may be republished online or in print under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, on these terms:

  1. Credit the author and IVN. Keep the byline ("By Author Name, Independent Voter News") and the attribution note at the end, which links to the original.
  2. Keep the meaning. You may update time and place references and apply your house style. You may trim for length, as long as the cuts don't change the meaning or misrepresent the author. Keep the headline. Mark any additions as your own (for example "Additional reporting by ...").
  3. Translations are welcome. Translate faithfully, add "Translated from English by [your outlet]", and tell us at editor@ivn.us.
  4. Keep the links, including the link to the original article.
  5. Keep the tracking image. The HTML includes a 1-pixel image that counts readers on your page. It collects no personal information.
  6. Photos and illustrations. Images credited to IVN may be used with this article only. Images credited to others (AP, Getty, Unsplash, Wikimedia and so on) stay under their owners' terms. Secure the rights or switch "Include images" off.
  7. Don't sell it. You can't sell our articles or sell ads specifically against them. Your normal site advertising is fine.
  8. No implied endorsement. Don't suggest that IVN or the author endorses you, your candidates or your causes, or that donations to you support IVN.
  9. Keep labels. Opinion or analysis pieces keep that label.
  10. Point search engines to the original. Where your CMS allows, set the canonical URL to the original IVN article.
  11. No bulk or automated republishing, and don't submit our articles to aggregators (Apple News, Google News, MSN) as your own.
  12. Corrections and removals. Update your copy when we correct it, and remove it promptly if we ask. We'll contact you at the email you give us.
  13. Questions or print republication: editor@ivn.us.

IVN staff: fill in who you're inviting above, then create the invite.

Preparing the article

“We the People” vs “They the Not People”

Choose a format
  • HTML
  • Email HTML
  • Markdown
  • Formatted (.docx)
  • Plain text
  • WordPress blocks
  • PDF
Choose a platform

Photos credited to others need their owners' permission.

To for

Republishing somewhere else? Questions? editor@ivn.us