Constitution Cafe, Jefferson's Brew a True Revolution

¶ … Constitution Cafe, Jefferson's Brew a True Revolution Constitution Cafe: Jefferson's Brew for a True Revolution discusses the reasons for and possibilities of regularly reviewing and rewriting the U.S. Constitution. Following Thomas Jefferson, the author believes that the document is flexible and should be regularly rewritten by common citizens. Phillips explored this possibility in interviews and discussions with many individuals and groups throughout the United States. In addition, Phillips offers his own suggestions. While the basic idea is admirable, the results are mixed.

Christopher Phillips' Constitution Cafe: Jefferson's Brew for a True Revolution explores the idea of American citizens reviewing and rewriting the U.S. Constitution. Phillips discusses the ideas of James Madison, who participated in writing the U. S Constitution, and of Thomas Jefferson, who did not participate in writing the U.S. Constitution but was still one of the most influential Founding Fathers of our nation. Phillips especially explores Jefferson's idea that the U.S.

Constitution should be reviewed and rewritten every 20 years because: knowledge and circumstances change; people who are directly involved with writing the Constitution will be more interested and "invested" in it; and if people do not get involved in reviewing and rewriting the Constitution, the government leaders will be like wolves. Instead of treating the Constitution like a rigid structure that cannot be changed except by Amendments, Phillips and Jefferson (according to Phillips) treat the Constitution like a living document.

For Phillips, rewriting the Constitution is not only a good idea but a vitally important one. To illustrate and try his idea, Phillips traveled to many areas of America, interviewed and monitored discussions with different types of people, including Native Americans, students and members of Congress. Phillips discussed these interviews and meetings in the book, showing the different ideas people have about what the Constitution could be, about the possibility of changing the Constitution and about exactly what should be changed in the Constitution.

Phillips seemed to take nothing about the Constitution for granted, starting with "We the people," and encouraged a group discussion among students about the very meaning of the words and whether they should be replaced. He also had people discuss specific issues, including the hot issue of "the right to bear arms" granted by the 2nd Amendment, showing how different groups of people can have such fundamentally different ideas about the right that they eventually come up with very different suggested versions.

Phillips is not discouraged by the difficulties of different viewpoints because he points out the difficulties that the Founding Fathers had with writing the Constitution due to their disagreements. Through the discussions and interviews, Phillips stressed the importance of thoughtful, reasonable discussion in which people have to be considerate, even about ideas that are directly different from their own. For Phillips, this type.