Posted on 01/26/2018 5:39:49 AM PST by C19fan
The American Constitution is an outdated, malfunctioning piece of junk — and it's only getting worse.
When written, the Constitution made a morally hideous compromise with slavery that took a war and 750,000 lives to make right. And while its basic structure sort of worked for awhile in the 20th century, the Constitution is now falling prey to the same defects that has toppled every other similar governing document the world over.
(Excerpt) Read more at theweek.com ...
This is one of my pet peeves. The 24th amendment may have been well intentioned, but it produced a very bad moral hazard to the future functionality of our governing system.
You can't have a system in which people with no skin in the game get to vote for people who will give them goodies.
Eventually the people voting for goodies will overwhelm the system.
I’ve read his article and the earlier article of his he links to. I still am not seeing what is wrong with the way our government is currently working.
He’s complaining about the lack of democracy, but I suspect his real complaint is that he isn’t getting his way in policy all of the time.
And where does he get the idea that proportional parliamentary systems are so great? From history? Because it works so well in Italy, Spain, and South America?
“There has never been a Constitution like ours nor a country like ours. We are unique and that is what guys like this hate.”
I wonder if it’s possible under the Constitution to get rid of this little twinkie and his fellow cork soakers instead.
The U.S. Constitution is the greatest man-made document ever. It is not perfect but it recognizes that itself with the amendment process. Nothing wrong with the U.S. Constitution that cannot be fixed through the amendment process.
Slavery abolishment was the point, and State’s Rights were the right that the South felt was being removed by those violating 10th Amendment.
The Plantations were mass food producing elements that kept millions alive, and much was sent to Europe, as well. Slavery made that possible, although not right morally. The North exported a lot of products to Britain prior to that time, and were first concerned with states rights, prior to Civil War.
South felt their right to make those decisions were being violated, and slavery was their decision. At that time, many indentured servants worked as slaves, and were Europeans, who signed contracts to come to New World in exchange for labor for a number of years. The 1700s created a mass exodus of Europe.
In below link, the fight between Calhoun and Jackson was a precursor to North and South conflict...Last paragraph link.
http://www.historynet.com/states-rights-civil-war
Ryan Cooper, don’t look at us like that. Only women are supposed to look at us like that.
The author is not advocating a Convention of the States, but a new constitution in the European image. This should provide some good, raw meat for constitutional debaters.
I’ve an idea. Let’s throw Ryan Cooper out.
People who do not see the Constitution as the very acme of human self-governance are total idiots. Obviously he has read zero history about the founding of the nation, the Constitutional Convention, the debates, the issues, the Bill of Rights, the horse-trading and ratification. The most brilliant minds in the history of the world just managed to come together in this small outpost at the end of the world to devise a method of self-governance — what a miracle. All the founders were worried about government usurping the power from the people and preventing that was perhaps the biggest challenge they faced and addressed. They understood well tyrannies and monarchies.
No, a parliamentary system is a bad idea. The design was to separate powers and make it more difficult to get things done, so as to protect liberty.
You just can’t fix Stupid.
I am one of many who have been trying to convince you of that.
I keep pointing out that most people believe that it was.
Based on this? That's like saying most people on FR post nonsense just because you do.
The North had four times the population than the South, and it would be reasonable to believe that the vast majority of exports to Europe came from the North. What I learned in the last few years is that this is not true at all. Between 73 and 83% of all export value came from the South. The South literally produced the vast majority of the incoming European money stream.
Southern Independence was going to cut off this money stream to New York, and it was going to heavily damage their Shipping, Warehousing, Banking, Insurance, etc. Industries.
Southern independence represented a huge loss of financial power for the wealthy and powerful of the North East.
This guy has read NO history. Elections fixed by law are a protection of liberty. How convenient would it be for politicians to decide when the elections would be.
And a REAL bicameral legislature is obviously too burdensome! /sarcasm
This author should read John Adams’ A Defence of the Constitutions of Government, as well as Forrest McDonald. Then he wouldn’t come to such silly conclusions.
But authors like this believe that modern times have made society immune from the lessons of history.
You have me mistaken for someone else. I have continuously said (since I started getting involved in these civil war threads) that the war was not fought to abolish slavery. The war was fought to restore New York/Washington control over the lucrative Southern export trade. Their initial intent was to reestablish control, and continue USA slavery export production just as it was before.
I am the one that keeps reminding you that most people believe the propaganda that the war was fought to end slavery.
Based on this?
Based on hundreds of comments exactly like this that I have read continuously throughout my life. Most people do indeed believe the war was fought to end slavery.
Yeah, because the Eu is such a wonderful utopia with all the no go zones, the covering up of rapes by migrants, and the shitty economic policies that led to greece and spain’s economic collapse...
it can be done, i believe the trump administration is going to try... but we the people need to follow up with more trump like candidates. the 14th amendment section 3 will play a big part.
“Third fix is that your right to vote is suspended if you take money from the Government, welfare or salary. Otherwise, you have a conflict of interest.”
Personally I think that is the biggy and would solve a host of troubles.
Idiot.
That commie b@$t@rd can go pound salt.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.