> The framers of the Constitution, having experienced a popular revolution, were hardly recommending that the will of the majority be ignored. The Constitution

> The framers of the Constitution, having experienced a popular revolution, were hardly recommending that the will of the majority be ignored. The Constitution sought to fine-tune majoritarian democracy, not to silence it. Specifically they "fine-tuned" it by including a supermajority requirement for changing the Constitution. The argument that this constitutes oppression is therefore clearly an argument against the Constitution. OK, but own it. Instead the author is trying to have it both ways, paying obeisance to a sacred cow while insisting that we slaughter it.