In the mid-1700s those destined to become our Founders were still struggling with questions on how a government could survive if non-virtuous men could be citizens, vote and hold office. Back then, working the land or plying a trade was considered the mark of a virtuous man. But many men simply labored, with no land or significant property holdings. They might be good men, but did not meet the Classical Greek/Roman standard of virtue. There remained distrust that democracy would be ruinous such men acted on baser instincts. The Constitution staked out the high ground in declaring the people as sovereign, even if it took almost two centuries to include all citizens as The People.
It’s somewhat remarkable that the US survived the 20th century, as the notions of sovereign citizenship and the virtuous man shifted. Many now equate residents with citizens, making the latter responsible for the former. Far fewer citizens own land (a home) and property of value (durable goods) now than 50 years ago and very few non-citizen residents do either - half are 1-2 paychecks away from the poorhouse. But government provides a “safety net” of dependence for almost half of the population through economic value transfers (deductions & aid), courtesy of the other half of the population and increasing government debt. Today’s serfs serve the government as master, collecting EBTs on their iPhones.
What were once rights of virtuous men has almost inverted, with rights the symbols distinguishing virtuous men from others who could care less. As long as government maintains that “safety net” as a cradle-to-grave cycle of dependence, rights are what government tells them they have.
