I would add that our founding fathers were great thinkers and set up two methods of revolution .
1) A peaceful political revolution thru voting. We are in that process right now and the system they set up is working. Hampering that process with more rules and laws does not solve the problem and won’t help. Every law passed takes away our freedom and recourse and is used against us. I repeat the system is working if we will use it.
I am constantly amazed that conservatives will pass just as many laws as liberals and think it will solve the problem. But our laws are better, I am told. I am not an anarchist or a libertarian. it is a fine line and again, our founding fathers set up an amazing system.
2) the 2nd amendment if the first fails.
1) A peaceful political revolution thru voting. We are in that process right now and the system they set up is working. Hampering that process with more rules and laws does not solve the problem and won’t help.
I don't see how my proposed amendment hampers or constrains the people's free exercise of their liberties in any way. It only constrains those who would rule, and hampers the ability of powerful political machines to run our government.
Political parties have proven to be a pernicious evil, and there's nothing in the Constitution which grants them any rights, acknowledgement, or a seat at the table of power. Understanding the above, why should I hold them in any regard?
On the other hand, the People and the States are specifically mentioned in the Constitution, and in fact, the entire document is crafted with great care to restrain the federal government, putting limits on its enumerated powers.
It's no secret that the Framers held political parties in great disdain, and wanted to avoid partisanship within the ranks of the elected class. Alas, they didn't see fit to forbid open partisanship within the three branches of government, and here we are today.