3 ms·

But they did have the foresight to make it a document that could be edited. That part did take forethought and was revolutionary by men who were very much ahead

But they did have the foresight to make it a document that could be edited. That part did take forethought and was revolutionary by men who were very much ahead of their time. I understand that judgement of figures of the past by modern ethics is the newest trend, but history has to be given a bit of context and what is a given now was blasphemous at the time. Some of the things, like a constitution that could evolve, was not the norm.

not2b 6y ago
Every country that has a constitution has a mechanism to modify it, but the US Constitution is set up in a way that its most severe flaws can't be fixed (small rural states are over-represented but have a veto over any attempt to change this because 3/4 of the states must agree to any amendment).
- eej71 6y ago
  It isn't a flaw. It is part of the strength of the system.
  - JAlexoid 6y ago
    When a country that's only 70 years old goes into a civil war - that's not an indicator of a strong system.
    - saagarjha 6y ago
      A war which it recovered from and remains to this day the world's oldest federated state.
      - JAlexoid 6y ago
        By subverting the US Constitution.
- koheripbal 6y ago
  > Every country that has a constitution has a mechanism to modify it Sure, NOW that's standard. At the time, it was not. > the US Constitution is set up in a way that its most severe flaws can't be fixed This isn't a flaw at all. It is meant to ensure the broad geographic consensus is required to make fundamental changes. Reducing the political power of rural communities might be popular today among urban communities, but it is a recipe for escalating division and ultimately rebellion. There is great value in giving out-sized political power to remote colonies and communities. Further centralizing power in the capitals is a path to fascism.
- kube-system 6y ago
  That's not a flaw, it's a very intentional choice that enables the US to be the federation of states that it is. Changing that would be to fundamentally change the form of government that the US has.

not2b 6y ago

Every country that has a constitution has a mechanism to modify it, but the US Constitution is set up in a way that its most severe flaws can't be fixed (small rural states are over-represented but have a veto over any attempt to change this because 3/4 of the states must agree to any amendment).

eej71 6y ago
It isn't a flaw. It is part of the strength of the system.
- JAlexoid 6y ago
  When a country that's only 70 years old goes into a civil war - that's not an indicator of a strong system.
  - saagarjha 6y ago
    A war which it recovered from and remains to this day the world's oldest federated state.
    - JAlexoid 6y ago
      By subverting the US Constitution.
koheripbal 6y ago
> Every country that has a constitution has a mechanism to modify it Sure, NOW that's standard. At the time, it was not. > the US Constitution is set up in a way that its most severe flaws can't be fixed This isn't a flaw at all. It is meant to ensure the broad geographic consensus is required to make fundamental changes. Reducing the political power of rural communities might be popular today among urban communities, but it is a recipe for escalating division and ultimately rebellion. There is great value in giving out-sized political power to remote colonies and communities. Further centralizing power in the capitals is a path to fascism.
kube-system 6y ago
That's not a flaw, it's a very intentional choice that enables the US to be the federation of states that it is. Changing that would be to fundamentally change the form of government that the US has.