4 ms·

Excellent point. What I have never understood is that while the US constitution is relatively robust and, for the better part, has withstood the test of time,

by bbgm 16y ago

Excellent point. What I have never understood is that while the US constitution is relatively robust and, for the better part, has withstood the test of time, it is a document written to reflect the late 18th century, yet for some reason 21st century America seems to believe that it is a near immutable document and set of ideas. There is a need for a "refresh", or at least people should be willing to consider what aspects of the constitution have not aged as well as others.

stretchwithme 16y ago
Most of it is very, very good. But how we chose who represents us and the lack of approval we have of their actions are the big flaws. If we make a few changes, I think the ship can be put back on track. As far as what century it applies to, the problems of government are pretty timeless. When one class of people is free to exploit another, the results are the same no matter what century is it.
1337p337 16y ago
Well, part of the cleverness built into the constitution is a meta-rule describing the process for changing the constitution. Every system accumulates cruft, but if we have a mechanism to apply patches, then we can (in theory) accomplish some refactoring without an upheaval. The only issue is that modern politics in America is a lot more like trench warfare, with lines drawn and and fixed. Opinions on every issue fall along party lines, with a few exceptions.
- mdaniel 16y ago
  I hope dearly that Lawrence Lessig succeeds in actually calling a constitutional convention (http://www.callaconvention.org http://www.callaconvention.org), if for no other reason than to strike out your "in theory" qualifier.
philwelch 16y ago
While true, the problem is that our constitution also defines our civil rights and liberties. If you open the door to reexamining the Constitution, you open the door to butchering the Bill of Rights. Given how dysfunctional our political system is, I'll take an outdated and flawed constitution before letting the clowns in power now try and write a better one. Sure, maybe it's not vitally important that the Constitution outlaw the government quartering troops in our houses, but I would not like to see the people behind the Patriot Act, Guantanamo Bay, "extraordinary rendition", and internet wiretapping get a shot at "revising" the fourth and fifth amendments.

by bbgm 16y ago

stretchwithme 16y ago

Most of it is very, very good. But how we chose who represents us and the lack of approval we have of their actions are the big flaws. If we make a few changes, I think the ship can be put back on track. As far as what century it applies to, the problems of government are pretty timeless. When one class of people is free to exploit another, the results are the same no matter what century is it.

1337p337 16y ago

Well, part of the cleverness built into the constitution is a meta-rule describing the process for changing the constitution. Every system accumulates cruft, but if we have a mechanism to apply patches, then we can (in theory) accomplish some refactoring without an upheaval. The only issue is that modern politics in America is a lot more like trench warfare, with lines drawn and and fixed. Opinions on every issue fall along party lines, with a few exceptions.

mdaniel 16y ago
I hope dearly that Lawrence Lessig succeeds in actually calling a constitutional convention (http://www.callaconvention.org http://www.callaconvention.org), if for no other reason than to strike out your "in theory" qualifier.

philwelch 16y ago

While true, the problem is that our constitution also defines our civil rights and liberties. If you open the door to reexamining the Constitution, you open the door to butchering the Bill of Rights. Given how dysfunctional our political system is, I'll take an outdated and flawed constitution before letting the clowns in power now try and write a better one. Sure, maybe it's not vitally important that the Constitution outlaw the government quartering troops in our houses, but I would not like to see the people behind the Patriot Act, Guantanamo Bay, "extraordinary rendition", and internet wiretapping get a shot at "revising" the fourth and fifth amendments.