A Republic, If You Can Keep It

On the final day of the Constitutional Convention held in Philadelphia in 1787, 55 delegates across 12 states gathered to establish a new framework for the United States government, one that could overcome the weaknesses learned from the Articles of Confederation. Their efforts produced a system grounded in a strong central government balanced by a separation of powers among the three branches: the legislative, executive, and judicial.

James McHenry recorded Benjamin Franklin being asked whether the Convention had produced a Republic or a monarchy. Franklin replied, “A republic, madam, if you can keep it.”^[i] As America marks its semi-quincentennial, Franklin’s warning remains a stark reminder of the fragility and burden of Republic stewardship. Our nation’s founding was an act of defiance, but also of faith. The signers of the Declaration were divided in background but united in their belief that liberty was worth the cost. Independence began a responsibility passed to every generation to preserve the Republic.

Inheritance of our Republic is not guaranteed. Its endurance requires more than military success; it demands thoughtful, principled leadership, civic awareness, and ethical stewardship from those who wear the uniform. The American experiment is not self-sustaining. Our duty today is to actively uphold the principles upon which this nation was built. This article reflects on how American civic ideals endured through conflict and argues that uniformed leaders have a critical role in stewarding these principles through deliberate, ethical leadership.

The Invention of the Republic

In 1776, the American colonies did more than declare independence; they launched a bold political experiment grounded in Enlightenment philosophy. At a time when monarchies and hereditary rule dominated the globe, the Declaration of Independence advanced a radical premise: that governments derive “their just powers from the consent of the governed.”^[ii]  Drawing on Locke and Montesquieu, it challenged King George III and centuries of authoritarian rule, asserting popular sovereignty. Declaring inalienable rights of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness was easier than securing them. Facing the British Empire, rebels risked execution with no guarantee of success.

Few understood this fragility better than George Washington. Having led the Continental Army through years of hardship, he accepted the presidency not out of ambition but duty.^[iii]  His decision to step down after two terms cemented the peaceful transfer of power as a democratic norm. Washington’s Farewell Address warned of factionalism, foreign entanglements, and regional divisions, important lessons drawn from the Republic’s early years.^[iv] These were not abstract concerns, but hard-earned insights from a leader who had witnessed the republic nearly collapse under the Articles of Confederation.

The Founders looked to Rome’s virtues and its descent into tyranny, designing a system of checks and balances to withstand flawed leaders and political strife.^[v] The events of 1776 embodied the radical idea that free people could govern themselves, an experiment that depends on future vigilance as much as founding brilliance.

The Trials of Self-Government

The American story is an ongoing experiment; achievements paired with contradictions. While “liberty and justice for all,” was not universally applied, the nation has repeatedly corrected course. Ratified in 1787 after fierce debate, the Constitution has endured by balancing authority with autonomy.^[vi]  The 19^th century marked dramatic expansion – territorial gains, westward settlement, and industrial growth, strengthened the nation and its global positioning but at a moral cost.^[vii] Manifest Destiny justified the displacement of Native American tribes, while millions remained enslaved. The contradiction was evident: even as America declared that “all men are created equal,” equality was denied to vast portions of its population.

The Civil War was shaped by Abraham Lincoln’s visionary leadership and rhetoric, reframing the war from a military engagement into a struggle for the nation’s soul, declaring at Gettysburg that the war would bring “a new birth of freedom,” tying the war’s purpose to the ideals enshrined in 1776.^[viii] By doing so, Lincoln made it clear that the survival of democracy depended on eliminating slavery, which the nation was paying for with blood. The war’s aftermath ushered in what historian Eric Foner calls the second founding. The ratification of the 13^th, 14^th, and 15^th Amendments fundamentally redefined American citizenship and the relationship between individual liberty and the government.^[ix] As the 19th century gave way to the 20th, the United States emerged from internal division into a rising global power. The century ahead would test whether the republic born in revolution could lead a world scarred by total war and ideological confrontation.

The American Century

Henry Luce coined “The American Century” in 1941 to describe America’s rise as the dominant global power politically, economically, militarily, and culturally.^[x] Two World Wars turned an isolationist America into democracy’s chief defender. Abroad, America championed democracy while facing inequality at home. Victory in both wars proved its capacity to mobilize against imperialism and fascism that became triumphs both military and ideological.

Between these wars, the Great Depression spurred President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal, redefining the relationship between citizens and their government and underscoring federal responsibility in crisis.^[xi] The Civil Rights Movement challenged America to live up to its principles. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s advocacy for racial equality, culminating in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965, marked a long-overdue fulfillment of the promises enshrined in the Constitution and Declaration of Independence.^[xii]

During the Cold War, Presidents Truman, Kennedy, and Reagan each articulated a vision of the American ideal that was rooted in freedom, emphasizing containment, shared responsibility, and military strength. Yet, conflicts like Vietnam, Watergate, and covert operations abroad revealed tensions between American ideals and actions, demonstrating that global leadership required domestic integrity.

To be a model for democracy, it must ensure that its own elections are fair, accessible, and transparent. This means protecting the right to vote for all citizens, preventing suppression or intimidation, and maintaining trust in electoral outcomes. By upholding these standards at home, the U.S. demonstrates the values it promotes abroad, making its calls for democracy and human rights in other countries credible. A nation that fails to live up to its own ideals risks undermining the very principles it claims to defend, turning its influence into mere rhetoric rather than responsible leadership.

Crisis of Confidence: America at 200                            

The bicentennial celebration of 1976 unfolded amid significant national turmoil. The Vietnam War and the Watergate scandal left many Americans disillusioned with government authority, questioning not only political leaders but also the integrity of the democratic process itself. The war’s heavy human cost combined with the executive branch’s abuse of power, left citizens questioning both foreign policy and domestic governance.^[xiii]

According to the Pew Research Center, trust in the federal government plummeted from 77% in 1964 under President Johnson to just 36% by 1976, the year President Jimmy Carter took office.^[xiv] Amid this uncertainty, President Carter observed that the “symptoms of this crisis are all around us,” citing how America was dealing with multiple issues domestically: an energy crisis, unemployment, and inflation as reflections of deeper fatigue.^[xv]  Carter’s appeal was not simply economic, but a renewal of civic virtue that included service, conservation, and shared responsibility.

The bicentennial captured a country caught suspended between memory and momentum. A nation is still proud of its origins, but uncertain of the path forward. Americans sought comfort in the pageantry and patriotism, even as the government showed signs of wear and tear. Franklin’s warning, “A republic, if you can keep it,” remained unresolved. The years following 1976 did not mark an endpoint, but a transition. The late 20^th century offered hope of renewal, but no guaranteed solution. As the 21^st century dawned, new threats, both foreign and domestic, would arise to test not only American institutions but the resolve of the citizens entrusted to sustain them.

Will the Center Hold?

As the United States nears its 250^th year, W.B. Yeats warning: “Things fall apart, the center cannot hold” captures the strain on shared values and institutions.^[xvi]  September 11, 2001, shattered the illusion of American invincibility. Unity soon gave way to two decades of war that eroded national cohesion. Today, American politics is now marked by hyperpolarization, distrust, and gridlock. Pew Research reports that nearly 60% of Americans express a negative view toward the opposing party, with many harboring outright distrust.^[xvii] Compromise, debate, or even bipartisanship is viewed as a betrayal.

The digital revolution has accelerated this fragmentation. Digital media empowers activism, but also fuels disinformation, echo chambers, and mistrust that laid bare divisions seen during the COVID-19 pandemic.^[xviii] Public trust in key institutions that are core democratic institutions has likewise eroded. According to Gallup, confidence in Congress, the media, and even the electoral process is at historic lows, culminating in the January 6 attack that tested democratic resilience.^[xix] Just as trust is the foundation of military relationships and unit cohesion, it is equally essential to a functioning republic. Without trust, politics risks becoming a contest of force rather than persuasion. Whether the center can hold today depends on Americans’ ability to restore common purpose, civic responsibility, and trust in leaders, institutions, and in fellow citizens.

Memento Republica: Remember the Republic

At 250 years, America’s milestone demands more than commemoration, but a call for reflection on the burden of inheritance. Remembering the Republic is by recalling its history and carrying forward its ideals through deliberate stewardship. Stewardship means the careful and responsible management of something entrusted to one’s care. For citizens, it implies more than just obeying laws and paying taxes; it requires active participation in sustaining the health of communities and institutions. In Army doctrine, stewardship means improving an organization beyond one’s tenure.^[xx] For the military, this includes civic awareness, ethical conduct, and example-setting.

The United States Military Oath embodies this principle. American service members swear not to a ruler but to the Constitution, reflecting the subordination of the military to civilian authority. Established in 1789, the oath binds all officers and soldiers to support the framework of democracy itself. To wear the uniform is to exercise stewardship in both conduct and moral responsibility. Stewardship also involves everyday acts such as school board meetings, ballot counting rooms, and neighborly acts of integrity. This kind of stewardship is quieter, but a loud kind of patriotism that strengthens democracy as surely as great speeches or national ceremonies.

Historian Williamson Murray observes that military professionals must study history to sharpen judgment, identify patterns, and prepare leaders for complexity.^[xxi] The Roman Republic collapsed from within due to its erosion of virtues, economic instability, military decline, and corruption. The lesson is clear: democracy is not self-executing. Its survival depends on its citizens from all walks of life who commit to stewardship through community, sacrifice, and shared responsibility. To remember the Republic is to keep it.

Citizens or Spectators?

America’s greatest threat is not Russia or China, but the internal divisions and the temptation to retreat from civic responsibility. As Theodore Roosevelt declared in Citizenship in a Republic, “It is not the critic who counts…The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena…who errs, who comes short again and again, but who strives valiantly.”^[xxii] His words remind us that democracy depends on citizens who engage, not spectators who stand aside.

From Hamilton’s robust central government, Jefferson’s liberty, Frederick Douglass’s rebuke of slavery, Lincoln’s “better angels,” Roosevelt’s New Deal, Reagan’s individualism, Dr. King’s demand for equality, and beyond, Americans have always contested what the republic should be. Such debate is not weakness but the crucible of democratic renewal.

Each generation must decide whether it will shape the Republic or merely observe it. Citizenship demands discipline, sacrifice, and engagement. For service members who swear an oath to defend the Constitution, that responsibility carries special weight. In the 21^st century, that means informed vigilance, not blind loyalty; engaged citizenship, not passive consumption. It means reading widely, voting regularly, dissenting respectfully, and serving purposefully. The military principle of mission command depends on initiative and responsibility at all levels.^[xxiii] So too does democracy. A Republic endures only if its citizens dare greatly and keep it.

Jakob Hutter is a logistics officer in the Kansas Army National Guard. He holds a Master of Science in Organizational Leadership, a Bachelor of Science in History and is a member of the Military Writers Guild. The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Kansas Army National Guard, Department of the Army, or Department of Defense. Connect with him on LinkedIn here.

^Notes: