The experiment must work.

Maybe people don't understand this concept. The United States is a stunning, startling development. In the face of classical liberalism (let alone the more obvious opposition to monarchy, despotism, tyranny, oligarchy, aristocracy, and more recently communism and fascism), another nation rose out of the changes that swept Europe. Blake's look to France soon soured, and instead, his eyes, and others', turned West, to the revolution across the ocean. There, there was little constant influence of strata, stations, or class, or even the visible, tender connections of family.

And Religion.

What would Blake say about the state of the revolution in America now? The experiment that tossed his Tablets and Language, that was recreated in the Infernal way, in a new Method, in accordance with Natural Law?

I'm rambling -- here's the point -

This experiment needs to succeed. This experiment is still a valid one, but after decade of decade of proof, when is the experiment considered a success? When does the republic say: this is a maturing state, and be treated as such?

Is it when the optimism and naivete are truly drained away? When the cynicism mirrors those of older systems that have experienced constant upheaval and not with the benefit of planned, orderly, regularized change?

Funny that. Change promotes optimism. Participation allows expectation of difference, that allows the continuance of naivete.

It's an amazing experiment. A marvelous thing. But it must continue to question itself. That's the difference. The constant thought, test, observation, result, change.

A scientifically-driven cultural experiment.

And it's in many peoples' best interest that the experiment continues.