Protective Fictions: James Baldwin's Warning and the Church of the Founders - Tad Stoermer

[ihaveaquestion]

Jan 20, 2026
Jon Meacham's new essay in ‪@TheEconomist‬ opens with three words: "In the beginning."
He's not being subtle. He calls the Declaration "scriptural," describes it as "commandment and covenant," and compares Jefferson's words to the Gospel of John. Someone in my community nailed it: "If it sounds like church and feels like church, then I'm in church, not reading history."
So what happens when history becomes religion—and who benefits from the conversion?
...

Baldwin saw what Meacham won't ever admit: the fire isn't coming from outside. It's not tyrants "re-appearing," as Meacham warns. It's the conflict that was there from the beginning, finally demanding resolution.
The Declaration didn't promise equality and then fail to deliver. The Constitution didn't accidentally protect slavery—it was designed to. The three-fifths clause. The fugitive slave clause. The twenty-year protection of the slave trade. Features, not bugs.

You don't need a priesthood to understand American history. You need to look at who it hurt and who it helped. You need to listen to the people who fought it, not just the people who built it.
There are other ways to read this history. Ways that center challengers rather than founders. That treat the founding as contingent rather than sacred. That offer a usable past for people who need more than exhortation.

[JustAnotherGen]

1. Truth be told at last

And the rise of the Donold was a feature - not a bug. It was always in the margins as a possibility.