As if Majority Tyranny suddenly is not a huge threat to Liberty.
As for the ownership of property and its protection, again, this concept includes those with a little property, as well as those with a lot.
This guy's tripe is pure, unadulterated Marxism. He uses the flaws and biases of the Founders in an attempt to indict the ideal concept of individual rights and Liberty, subjecting them to the arbitrary whims of the mob.
The Founders, however selfish they may have been, knew very well the dangers of pure democracy. Those dangers have not changed one bit. Indeed, they have manifested themselves in murderous fashion throughout the 20th century, resulting in more widespread slaughter of human beings than at any time in recorded history.
This "flawed" document has produced the highest standard of living in the world, including more ownership of property by individuals, even considering the extra problems which our society has had to endure, such as, for example massive immigration, which puts pressure on labor markets as well as producing massive cultural friction.
What a crock of shit this guy is trying to peddle.
Democracy is not an ideal to be striven for, and despite the Founders' biases, it's a fact that a lot of the masses are too poorly informed to govern themselves.
Look at the massive welfare state which has resulted in widespread dependence and a profound lack of progress in the groups where it is most prevalent. Indeed, they have regressed in almost every measurable way.
As always, the solution for guys like this writer is always the same: all we need is more socialism/Marxism. Who'd have thunk it?
I wouldn't use this article for toilet paper if it was printed. Kindling, maybe...
Along with the rest of The Enlightenment thinkers, our founding generation determined the purpose of government was to secure unalienable rights, and said so in the Declaration.
That purpose was elaborated in the Preamble to our Constitution, which spoke of defense, justice, tranquility, happiness and liberty.
That purpose was defended by a Constitutionally complex division of power, and not through 18 year old and older universal suffrage.
If the goal of government remains defense of unalienable rights, then a return to the governing structure of 1787 is absolutely necessary.
OTOH, if the goal of government is to promote fuzzy, ill-defined ‘social justice' democracy, which is guaranteed to end in tyranny, then the path we are on will suffice.
The Left is getting away with destroying western civilization. They must be stopped. The only possible way to stop them is through an Article V state convention to propose constitutional amendments.
If this guy thinks we’re authoritarian now, he should wait to see just how authoritarian a true democracy (as opposed to a Constitutional Representstive Republic) can be.
Then again, he’s probably ok with that, believing that his side will win.
Something that a lot of people don’t get is that, under a true democracy, during the Red Scare of the 1950s Communists and their sympathizers wouldn’t have been blacklisted; they would have been hung from trees like Xmas ornaments. Legally.
I do think a lot of Progressives actually get this, tho. They know they dodged a huge bullet back then, know what could have happened under a different and more “democratic” governing structure, and perceiving themselves to be on the ascendency want that kind of power to act against their enemies.
“Democracy is not an ideal to be striven for, and despite the Founders’ biases, it’s a fact that a lot of the masses are too poorly informed to govern themselves.”
I fear that if we limited government participation to those who are well informed in this day of massive disinformation campaigns there might not be enough to fill all the superflous government positions. We have millions who don’t have a clue that George Wallace was NOT a Republican as some are trying to claim now. It is astounding how many actually believe Lincoln was a Democrat and an online multiple choice quiz on history and civics asked the question what form of government did the United States Constitution give to the country and claimed that the correct answer was “representative democracy”. At the current rate we will soon reach the point when only two or three obscure and unknown historians of very advanced age will have a clue about the truth concerning anything that happened more than thirty minutes ago.