This is a thoughtful lecture by political scientist Robert Kraynak of Colgate University. This lecture illustrates the difference between the way political scientists and historians approach the past. For example, I am not so sure the founders, as products of a world that was very different from our own, should serve as such a definitive guide for so many of the modern problems we face today. I am always a bit skeptical when someone tries to suggest how the founders would react to 21st- century developments that would have been foreign to their 18th- century world.
I like his point that both conservatives and progressives appeal to the founders for support.
Kraynak understands the moral vision of the founding fathers in terms of “republican liberty,” “republican self-government,” or “ordered liberty.” The founders, he argues, believed that the United States was a test or experiment to see if people could govern themselves in an orderly way. His points about “negative liberty” and “positive liberty” are worth noting.
This is a classic “republican” interpretation of the founding.
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DF4tIM3g4pU]RECOMMENDED READING
Practice virtue. Get vaccinated 
Liberty University sues Jerry Falwell Jr. for $10 million 
Anyone who wants to believe that Independence Day is a Christian holiday should read Frederick Douglass’s “What to a Slave is the Fourth of July?” David Barton speaks at First Baptist-Dallas. 
Josh Hawley’s “Love America Act.” Let’s break it down
For example, I am not so sure the founders, as products of a world that was very different from our own, should serve as such a definitive guide for so many of the modern problems we face today.
…
I like his point that both conservatives and progressives appeal to the founders for support.
John, look how you've illustrated the problem. Modern progressives alternately disavow the relevance of the Founders then turn around and claim them.
Modern liberalism is only 100-150 years old, and not atall the same thing as the “classical” liberalism of the Founders.
If we're going to dump the Founding principles, fine–the Constitution permits amending them. But let's start being more honest about what we're doing.
Tom: The first statement was my opinion about the limits of history. The second point was my approval of Kraynak's observation.
I see that, JF. However, I disagree strongly with the idea that our modern left-wing/liberals have an equal claim on our Founding principles.
http://americancreation.blogspot.com/2013/09/progressives-and-principles-of-founding.html
When academic historian scholars speak about our own times, they too must defend their ideas. It's only fair.
And proper.
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-authority.html
😉