Watch a video replay of the event below:

The following op-ed was published in The Philadelphia Inquirer on February 10, 2013.

I never feel so needed and loved as during the months leading up to an election: the constant e-mails, phone calls, and an overflowing mailbox. That’s when politicians discover social media and engaging with citizens – for donations and help with campaigns.

The minute the election is over, all that disappears, and we’re back to government as usual. Government right now is functioning on the cutting edge – of 1973. While most areas of our lives benefit from having all the world’s information on our smartphones, government remains stubbornly behind.

Slaves in Virginia in the 1670s. Source: Wikimedia Commons.

Throughout 2012, we’ll be celebrating the 225th anniversary of the Constitution. But the Constitution drafted and signed in 1787 was just the beginning–since then, “We the People” have amended the Constitution 27 times.

Today we celebrate the anniversary of the 13th Amendment (ratified December 6, 1865). Here’s what you need to know:

WHAT IT DOES

The 13th Amendment abolished slavery in the United States.

WHY IT WAS ADDED

The delegates at the Constitutional Convention wrestled with the issue of slavery. Southern delegates had threatened to leave the convention if slavery was in jeopardy, while other delegates were opposed, or at least hesitant, to enshrine the “peculiar institution” in the Constitution.

In the end, the delegates compromised:

• Article I, Section 2, allowed three-fifths of the number of slaves to be included in population counts that determined taxation and representation.
• Article I, Section 9, prevented the importation of slaves from being banned until the year 1808.
• Article IV, Section 2, required that slaves escaping to another state be returned to their prior state.

The fact that the delegates avoided using the word slavery reflects their discomfort with the topic. The Constitution variously refers to slaves as “all other Persons,” “Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit,” and “Person[s] held to Service or Labour in one State.”

Ultimately, the Constitution managed to delay, but not resolve, the problems of slavery. Tensions about slavery and states’ rights culminated in the ultimate constitutional crisis, the Civil War.

Related Story: The case of the missing 13th Amendment to the Constitution

During the war, President Abraham Lincoln had issued the Emancipation Proclamation, which ordered the freedom of slaves in Confederate states. To solidify the freedom of all slaves, a constitutional amendment was needed. (Abraham Lincoln’s pursuit of the 13th Amendment is thoroughly explored in the recent film Lincoln.)

The 13th Amendment was the first of three “Reconstruction amendments” passed after the Civil War. The 14th Amendment defined U.S. citizenship, including former slaves. The 15th Amendment said no one could be denied the right to vote based on “race, color, or previous condition of servitude.”

Nearly a century after it was created, the Constitution finally drew closer to the self-evident truth set forth in the Declaration of Independence–that “all men are created equal.”

WORD-FOR-WORD

Celebrate the 225th anniversary of the Constitution and civic holidays and milestones throughout the year! Download the National Constitution Center’s 2012 civic calendar here.

Holly Munson is a programs coordinator at the National Constitution Center and the assistant editor of Constitution Daily.

Recent Constitution Daily Stories

Jeb Bush to become chairman of National Constitution Center
Is John Boehner becoming the face of the fiscal cliff?
Tea Party leader’s sudden decision to quit and the fiscal cliff
The case of the missing 13th amendment to the Constitution

Active citizens engaging and serving in their communities have been at the core of our democracy since the nation’s founding. We’ve seen it in rhetoric from our leaders, from Abraham Lincoln’s “better angels of our nature” to Barack Obama’s “united we serve.” And we’ve seen it in action: ordinary Americans uniting in a willingness to come together under extraordinary circumstances to serve, even to save, others.

Few circumstances are more extraordinary than a natural disaster, and Hurricane Sandy has been no exception. And the hurricane’s hit has been followed by swarms of volunteers and an outpouring of support.

Have you found a way to get involved? Tell us about it! Plus, here are some starting points for getting involved.

Waterfront at Williamsburg, Brooklyn, New York. [www.thoughtcatalog.com Thought Catalog

Red Cross

What it does: The Red Cross is perhaps the best known resource for helping out in disasters. You can donate funds, learn how to donate blood, and help in numerous other ways.

Website: redcross.org

Salvation Army

What it does: The Salvation Army will work to feed people who were affected by the storm.

Website: salvationarmyusa.org

Guidestar

What it does: If you plan to make an extensive donation, use Guidestar to research different options. It has an extensive guide about the best ways to give to charity in times of disaster. One hint: donating in the future may be a better way to help, since disaster recovery efforts can take years.

Website: guidestar.org

Jersey Cares

What it does: Do you want to volunteer in a specific region such as New Jersey? There’s a website for that–Jersey Cares helps you find the areas that need help.

Website: jerseycares.org

Food Bank NYC

What it does: You can donate your food, time, and support to the organization to help feed New York’s hungry.

Website: foodbanknyc.org

New York Cares

What it does: New York Cares mobilizes volunteers for needed areas in New York.

Website: newyorkcares.org

Recovers

What it does: Recovers helps community members organize recovery efforts.

Website: recovers.org/communities

ASPCA

What it does: Don’t forget about our animal friends! The Wall Street Journal says about 240 animals are staying with their owners in pet-friendly Red Cross shelters. You can donate to rescue and shelter animals affected by the storm at the ASPCA’s website.

Website: blog.aspca.org

AmeriCares

What it does: AmeriCares provides medicine and other supplies to people affected by Hurricane Sandy.

Website: americares.org

Save the Children

What it does: Save the Children provides resources to families.

Website: savethechildren.org

World Vision

What it does: World Vision distributes flood clean-up kits, personal hygiene items, and emergency food.

Website: worldvision.org

The National Conference on Citizenship is an annual event that focuses on the state of civic engagement in America, and brings together civic leaders, educators, CEOs, and representatives from each branch of government to address issues related to our nation’s civic health.

The theme for this year’s Conference is “Jobs, Jobs, Jobs: Exploring the link between civic engagement and employment.” The Conference will showcase and present new research and programs that explore the role all types of civic engagement play in creating thriving communities. This includes announcement of the winners of the first-ever Civic Data Challenge, and highlight of a new corporate citizenship initiative called The Civic 100, which explores how businesses make a difference in communities. NCoC will also present its annual awards and conduct a “Sworn Again American“ ceremony. More information is available at NCoC.net/conference.

The Conference will be streamed live beginning at 1 p.m. Eastern until 5:30 p.m. Eastern. During this time, questions will be taken via Twitter and U-Stream chat from online participants to ask during the event. The official conference hashtag is #NCoC.

Live broadcast by Ustream

Howard Rheingold, an early and influential advocate of the democratic potential of the Internet, used the pages of the Whole Earth Review to suggest it would become “the great equalizer” due to the manner in which it would shift “the balance of power between citizens and power barons”; while in The Electronic Republic (1996) Lawrence Grossman similarly created transformative expectations by suggesting it would “extend government decision-making from the few in the center of power to the many on the outside who may wish to participate.”

The Internet would for these campaigners not just supplement conventional politics but lead to a paradigm shift in the nature and process of governing as technological developments would allow citizens to reclaim control over public affairs.

Political participation would become more convenient, information more readily available and accessible, public deliberation involving large numbers of people would become easier. This would, in turn, cultivate greater social understanding of competing viewpoints and on-line voting would facilitate a deeper and more direct form of democracy. Digital democracy would, therefore, offer a way of closing the expectations gap and help in forging a more mature and realistic debate about both the failures and successes of democratic politics.

A decade or so later I am left wondering what happened, what went so wrong.

Although there is a clear link between access to the Internet and the drive towards democratization, as clearly seen in the Arab Spring, in those long-standing Western democracies the Internet’s influence is, on the whole, destructive. Far from fostering democratic values or active citizenship, cyberspace has emerged not as a public arena dedicated to the common good but as a fragmented landscape of shrill and sectional demands, united by the simple belief that politicians are venal, stupid, and mendacious.

The history of digital democracy is littered with great hopes, dashed expectations, and broken promises. We remain information rich, yet knowledge poor, which is a great shame because digital democracy promised so much (but has delivered so little).

This sober and pessimistic argument is reinforced in a more recent body of writing that has charted the Internet’s role as a mediator between the governors and the governed. Books including Vincent Mosco’s The Digital Sublime (2004), Matthew Hindman’s The Myth of Digital Democracy (2008), and Stephen Coleman and Jay Blumler’s The Internet and Democratic Citizenship (2009) all point to a legacy of dashed expectations and the evolution of an impoverished relationship between the public and politicians.

In terms of who uses the Internet for harvesting political information or engaging in political activity, the evidence is clear: It is generally only that small section of the public who have always been politically engaged and active.

Online activity therefore tends to mirror offline activity and there is little evidence that the Internet has allowed the previously disengaged to reconnect. What is more, research suggests that contrary to closing the knowledge gap, the Internet has actually widened this gap, creating what could be called a “fatter” model of democratic elitism rather than a broader, flatter model of vibrant mass politics. Put slightly differently, the Internet may have delivered a political world that is denser, wider, and possibly more inclusive and pluralistic but only to a minority of people who were already engaged.

Where exactly is the virtual public sphere? Where is the web site that stands-up for the public interest rather than the demands of sectional interests? Where is the site that forces citizens to encounter different perspectives about the distribution of increasingly scarce resources? Where is the mechanism for building social bridges?

In reality, the nature and structure of the Internet has done the opposite. As Cass Sunstein argues in his Republic.Com 2.0 (2009), it has allowed people to pick and choose sites in a way that reduces engagement with alternative viewpoints and reinforces partisanship.

The result is a shift towards well-organized “smart mobs,” “information cocoons” and “echo chambers”, wherein users avoid the news and opinions that they simply do not want to hear.

Balkanized groups tend to move towards the views of their most radical members. Members of such groups do not understand other perspectives or learn how to relate to people who are different. Beliefs (even completely false ones) are therefore reinforced rather than challenged. Not realizing that most thoughtful citizens do not agree with them, online group members generally assume that the government is either failing or corrupt when it takes contrary positions.

The result is a form of political activity, practiced by a comparatively small section of the public, which is increasingly shrill and aggressive in its approach to politics and politicians while also being increasingly unrealistic about what politics can and should deliver. The Internet has therefore provided a voice and a platform for an increasing range of sectional demands but not one attuned to cultivating or promoting any conception of the common general good.

As a result, just at the historical moment when we need a richer relationship between politics and politicians in order to confront the shared challenges we face, the Internet has delivered an arguably more impoverished relationship than we have ever had because of its failure to build social bonds across and between competing groups.

This insular form of attitude reinforcement breeds a dangerous form of detachment, in which those who use the Internet as a political forum are rarely challenged to consider alternative viewpoints or how the common good might make compromise necessary.

“Digital natives” tend to fall into a naive view that the general public shares their own view of the world and as a result politics is failing. As a further consequence, crude libertarian, anti-political, and anti-establishment values flourish and manifest themselves in a worldview that appears dedicated to maintaining the population in a perpetual state of self-righteous rage.

And yet in some strange way I am quite glad that the predictions of a digital democracy have proved mythical.

To me the promise of digital democracy and online engagement appeared not simply to be an excuse for laziness but, more importantly, it completely overlooked the central and defining essence of democratic politics. Politics revolves around building relationships, forging trust and emotional connections that can never be built through tapping a keyboard or adopting a disembodied telepresence.

Politics is a face-to-face human activity and the danger of on-line engagement is that it could supplant off-line participation in those social groups that so often make a real difference to people’s lives. If Robert Putnam hates the television for its impact on social capital, I similarly loathe the Internet for its impact on the lives and attitudes of the younger generation. Virtual communities are dead communities and I don’t want to be bowling alone in a network society.

Matthew Flinders is Professor of Politics at the University of Sheffield. His latest book, Defending Politics: Why Democracy Matters in the 21st Century, has just been published by Oxford University Press.

On the 3^rd of May we visited Washington, D.C. as a part of the project “At The Table” exchange visit.  In the morning everybody seemed tired, but ready for the journey.  The thought of going to the capital of the United States itself made me feel great about what was going to await us during our day and I was glad, that I wasn’t mistaken because the day turned out really great!

The trip itself seemed quiet and peaceful; however, we could hear laughter and joyful chatting.  Since the very arrival in Washington I was amazed.  The architecture and the look of the city surprised me as it was really beautiful and breathtaking.

Everything was so beautiful, that I don’t even remember a time when I didn’t have my camera switched off.  For me, as a tourist, the view was truly magnificent, but I couldn’t understand how people could possibly get used to that place.  How is it possible to get used to a city where everything is historical and magnificent?

We spent most of our day walking around and admiring different monuments and I can say that I don’t regret a single minute spent next to Lincoln’s memorial and other historical sites and monuments.  The history and meaning of these monuments fascinated me and made me think of what we value in our lives and what other cultures value more.

The end of the day was full of special moments – starting with our visit to the Department of State, which is our project grantor.  We met really open people and expressed our opinions about the project as well as reflected our most cherished moments in project and the greatest memories, ending with a 4 hour drive back to Philadelphia in which we could hear different stories, jokes, we could play different games and just laugh.  For me personally the ride back to Philadelphia was worth as much as the time spent in Washington!

Generally about the day I can say that it was more than successful – it was perfect!  During this day we not only learned more about the history of America and their culture, but we also shared our emotions, feelings and got to know our U.S. friends better.

At the Table: Connecting Culture, Conversation and Service in Latvia and the U.S. was funded in part by a grant from the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs in collaboration with American Association of Museums. The opinions, findings and conclusions stated herein are those of the author[s] and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Department of State.

This day was one of the best days while being in America, because it was the day we worked on our service project.  In the morning we went to a school in which we had a chance to participate in a program called “Eat-a-quette” which is created by the chef Marc Vetri.  This program tries to change schools lunch habits in Philly schools.

At first when we arrived there, in the early morning it seemed to be a very remote district of Philadelphia.  The building clearly did not resemble a school.  When our group entered, we were greeted by the school’s principal.  After that we went to the dining room (cafeteria).

The weather was not the sunniest, but the joy of children was warm and made me feel happy and impressed.  I noticed the differences between Latvian children and American students of this age (7-12).  Students in Latvia are quieter and also more reserved.

It seemed that they haven`t used this new type of lunch, which is everyday lunch for Latvian children.  They were eating family style- from one plate sharing the food with others.  To us, in Latvia it is a common thing and such common “eating ritual” we do every time when we have lunch at school.  I felt a bit proud that Latvians already have family-style lunch, which is still a goal to Americans.

In this project we split up, some of us went to the kitchen to help the chefs, while the rest helped preparing the dining tables.  And also the children have to set their own tables, which we helped them do in the beginning.  Soon a group of students arrived.  I bet we looked nervous in the beginning.  Soon after we sat down at our tables, it seemed that the students were more afraid of us than we were of them.  After the second group, when the younger students came, it started to get fun.

American students communicated with us a lot and asked many questions about my country, my look and the “At the table” project.  It was fun to talk with them and to see the differences in culture, religion, and attitudes.  The little children were more open and out-going compared to the older ones.  They asked us a lot of questions – How many languages do you speak? Where’s Latvia? Do you like USA? But one of questions what was asked by the only girl at our table – Did your mommy come, too?

To me these children seemed like the happiest beings in our whole trip. Careless and simply happy, even though they were sitting in a school, which I have noticed is not all children’s’ most favorite thing to do?

And I came to a conclusion, that by teaching children how to share with something that is vital to them (like food), they start to care and think in a more abstract level for what is known as friendship!  Just like it taught them to care about things around them, including the people around them, this day reminded me to care more about my new American friends from Philadelphia.

At the Table: Connecting Culture, Conversation and Service in Latvia and the U.S. was funded in part by a grant from the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs in collaboration with American Association of Museums. The opinions, findings and conclusions stated herein are those of the author[s] and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Department of State.

It was the first visiting day of our amazing trip and it was a day full of excitement and expectations. The time difference between Philadelphia and Latvia is seven hours, and it means that we had to adapt to the new time zone, but it had no effect on me or on my neighboring roommate, Victoria Kosela. We were too excited!

At 9.30 a.m. our meeting was scheduled–we had to be ready precisely on time! We woke up at 8.30 a.m. cheerful and rested in our comfortable room. When we went down for breakfast, we were one of the first. We were in an excited mood!

We met our project colleagues and friends, and then we went to the National Constitution Center. I loved the geometrically organized streets, the green spreading trees, the smooth asphalt and, of course, the massiveness and novelty of the buildings.

The National Constitution Center is an airy, harmonic, beautiful building and it bears deep history in the ideas it brings to the nation. Inside we saw big, lighted rooms, and in the main hall there were flags of every state. At one time I thought I am in the film, because everything I saw was what I had seen in Hollywood films.

Later we went to the bus stop, which was very different from our stops. We waited the bus for a long time, because it was the weekend. During this time we shared our first impressions and took photos of everything around.

For the locals it was the usual view, seen hundreds of times, but certainly not for us. When the bus arrives, I was surprised to see that the bus driver was a woman, as this is not usual in our country. The short bus ride was to Eastern State Penitentiary, which was one of the most expensive and famous prisons in the U.S., but now it is a historical site. I was a bit scared when learning the details of this brutal prison life.

Near the Eastern State Penitentiary there was the Edgar Allan Poe house, which was small and cozy building. The museum workers took us into a small theater where we watched a film about Poe’s life.

As we toured his house, I found Poe’s destiny to be quite mystical and interesting. When we left the house we heard the sounds of an ice-cream truck. We had never heard or seen something like this. It was a funny reaction from us all, because this is not usual in Latvia!

Last, we went in Latvian Society. It made me feel like I was in Latvia again.  The art, literature, and even the smells were reminiscent of Latvia. It was nice to hear the people, who spoke Latvian and understood Russian. In the Latvian Society we had a great meal and also communication, we took pictures, looked inside a really rich library; although I was from Latvia, I didn’t know about part of the Latvian literature works, which were available there.

After a long day of actives, we were all ready to get back to our hotel and then happened something really funny–we saw a yellow school bus, which we have only seen in movies.  We started to take pictures and driver welcomed us inside. The American friends were shocked about our reaction to bus, which is a simple everyday experience for them, actually not even worth mentioning, but for us this was a once in a lifetime experience.

The day was amazing and we couldn’t imagine the next days of our exchange visit. Our group decided to walk around the city.  We had a map, but didn’t even need to use it! We had better orientation without it! Philadelphia excited us with its largeness and differences to our small Riga city center.

At the Table: Connecting Culture, Conversation and Service in Latvia and the U.S. was funded in part by a grant from the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs in collaboration with American Association of Museums. The opinions, findings and conclusions stated herein are those of the author[s] and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Department of State.

On Thursday, the day before the last of our trip, we got up early to head off to our final school visit. We got on our bus and drove two and a half hours away to a very small town called Lizums. The school we visited was in an old castle belonging to a man named Baron Wolfe.

First, we received a tour through the main castle tower,  which had been converted into the school’s own mini museum, and then we got the whole school tour which included a viewing of the top-secret chemicals in the science teachers’ “lab” and a walk into the teeny room called the “DJ room” which was spray painted with cool designs to give a hip funky artsy vibe.

After a quick delicious lunch at the local cafe, we then split into groups according to color of our name tags and rotated through the different events planned for us.

My group went to watch, and even try for ourselves, a folk dancing performance by some students from the Lizums school. Then my group was brought back to the castle to brainstorm ideas about civic engagement and contrast American culture with Latvian culture.

After that, we moved on to my favorite part of the day…the CANDY FACTORY! We were able to try to wrap some of the caramels ourselves and then buy bags upon bags of the candies produced in the factory as we were leaving.

We then returned to the castle-school to present each group’s brainstorms (from the part of the day when we discussed civic engagement) to the entire group. After a big photo on the front steps of the school, we said our goodbyes and took the long bus ride home.

To end the busy day, we went to find a restaurant that was highly recommended by a new friend; after about 30 minutes of running around in circles, we finally found the restaurant, and though some of us were frustrated and hungry after our wild goose chase, the magnificent food was well worth the wait.

At the Table: Connecting Culture, Conversation and Service in Latvia and the U.S. was funded in part by a grant from the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs in collaboration with American Association of Museums. The opinions, findings and conclusions stated herein are those of the author[s] and do not necessarily reflect those of the U.S. Department of State.

Image via Rootsweb.

Throughout 2012, we’ll be celebrating the 225th anniversary of the Constitution. But the Constitution drafted and signed in 1787 was just the beginning–since then, “We the People” have amended the Constitution 27 times.

Today we celebrate the anniversary of the 14th Amendment (ratified July 9, 1868). Here’s what you need to know:

WHAT IT DOES

The 14th Amendment defines U.S. citizenship, including black Americans.

WHY IT WAS ADDED

The 14th Amendment was the second of three Reconstruction Amendments passed in the years following the Civil War. The 13th banned slavery, and the 15th prohibits denying the right to vote based on race.

In the short term, the 14th Amendment resolved the legal status of former slaves–it granted them citizenship and “equal protection of the laws.” Today, the 14th Amendment is referenced frequently in court cases making claims for legal equality.

WORD-FOR-WORD

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

Celebrate the 225th anniversary of the Constitution and civic holidays and milestones throughout the year! Download a hi-res PDF for the National Constitution Center’s 2012 civic calendar from our Education page.

Holly Munson is a programs coordinator at the National Constitution Center and the assistant editor of Constitution Daily.

Recent Constitution Daily Stories

An essential health care change you may have missed
Murdoch spat with Romney part of social media age
Muhammad Ali to receive National Constitution Center’s 2012 Liberty Medal
Polls: Many voters don’t know, don’t care about health care case
Romney camp drops a hint about Condoleezza Rice