6 ms·

> the rigidity of the Constitution is probably it's greatest strength Yeah. I’m with you there. It’s that way by design along with things like the presidency n

> the rigidity of the Constitution is probably it's greatest strength Yeah. I’m with you there. It’s that way by design along with things like the presidency not having ultimate power. The system’s not perfect, but let any modern politician make substantive changes, and I’d bet heavily on the system getting worse.

checkyoursudo 4y ago
We should not idolize a past that did not exist. The politicians during the 1780s were not more virtuous, cooperative, or intelligent than the politicians of today. I tend to agree more with Thomas Jefferson: "On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation. They may manage it then, and what proceeds from it, as they please, during their usufruct. They are masters too of their own persons, and consequently may govern them as they please. But persons and property make the sum of the objects of government. The constitution and the laws of their predecessors extinguished then in their natural course with those who gave them being. This could preserve that being till it ceased to be itself, and no longer. Every constitution then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right.—It may be said that the succeeding generation exercising in fact the power of repeal, this leaves them as free as if the constitution or law had been expressly limited to 19 years only. In the first place, this objection admits the right, in proposing an equivalent. But the power of repeal is not an equivalent. It might be indeed if every form of government were so perfectly contrived that the will of the majority could always be obtained fairly and without impediment. But this is true of no form. The people cannot assemble themselves. Their representation is unequal and vicious. Various checks are opposed to every legislative proposition. Factions get possession of the public councils. Bribery corrupts them. Personal interests lead them astray from the general interests of their constituents: and other impediments arise so as to prove to every practical man that a law of limited duration is much more manageable than one which needs a repeal." https://jeffersonpapers.princeton.edu/selected-documents/thomas-jefferson-james-madison https://jeffersonpapers.princeton.edu/selected-documents/tho...
- ericmay 4y ago
  But then you site one of those politicians who wrote actual thoughtful discourse. Is there a single politician in office or who has recently left office in America who has written anything approaching the thoughtfulness of even this short piece? I have to believe that even if it were true that many or most politicians in 1780 were similar to politicians today on levels that you mention that they still had a serious crop of worthy political intellectuals whereas today we have probably 0.
  - JKCalhoun 4y ago
    In what forum today are politicians given an opportunity to speak/write intellectually? Sadly too, there has been for some time an under current of anti-intellectualism in politics. It is my understanding that Barack Obama, as an example, is highly educated, no doubt could engage in lofty discussions… that would be political suicide.
    - eternalban 4y ago
      > In what forum today are politicians given an opportunity to speak/write intellectually? That quote is from a letter from Jefferson to Madison. Barack Obama famously wrote a book. A "leader" leads by example. So I have a different take than your "sadly politicians are discouraged from thinking" and it goes like this: Patronizing and conditioning the political discourse to be at the level of 'high school civics class' is a powerful mechanism for keeping actual thinkers away from politics.
  - snapplebobapple 4y ago
    Ron Paul. That is literally it.
    - blaser-waffle 4y ago
      the guy whose platform is going back on the gold standard and abolishing embassies to other countries? i'll give him credit for having a consistant platform and world view, but if he had his way we'd hand control of everything over to corporations -- and that's what his son is doing everything in his power to make happen.
rnk 4y ago
As we learned with Trump, there aren't enough limits on the president's power. Especially if the majority in congress just want to keep the bs power coming from their majority - they won't vote against them. The us constitution is vulnerable to the charismatic dictator trope. I wouldn't have believed it before Trump, but a lot of people went along with him because they thought they could stop him later, they thought he wouldn't go that far, they thought other people would stop him. But in our country, we need much greater limits on the president in law and the constitution.

checkyoursudo 4y ago

We should not idolize a past that did not exist. The politicians during the 1780s were not more virtuous, cooperative, or intelligent than the politicians of today. I tend to agree more with Thomas Jefferson: "On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation. They may manage it then, and what proceeds from it, as they please, during their usufruct. They are masters too of their own persons, and consequently may govern them as they please. But persons and property make the sum of the objects of government. The constitution and the laws of their predecessors extinguished then in their natural course with those who gave them being. This could preserve that being till it ceased to be itself, and no longer. Every constitution then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19 years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right.—It may be said that the succeeding generation exercising in fact the power of repeal, this leaves them as free as if the constitution or law had been expressly limited to 19 years only. In the first place, this objection admits the right, in proposing an equivalent. But the power of repeal is not an equivalent. It might be indeed if every form of government were so perfectly contrived that the will of the majority could always be obtained fairly and without impediment. But this is true of no form. The people cannot assemble themselves. Their representation is unequal and vicious. Various checks are opposed to every legislative proposition. Factions get possession of the public councils. Bribery corrupts them. Personal interests lead them astray from the general interests of their constituents: and other impediments arise so as to prove to every practical man that a law of limited duration is much more manageable than one which needs a repeal." https://jeffersonpapers.princeton.edu/selected-documents/thomas-jefferson-james-madison https://jeffersonpapers.princeton.edu/selected-documents/tho...

ericmay 4y ago
But then you site one of those politicians who wrote actual thoughtful discourse. Is there a single politician in office or who has recently left office in America who has written anything approaching the thoughtfulness of even this short piece? I have to believe that even if it were true that many or most politicians in 1780 were similar to politicians today on levels that you mention that they still had a serious crop of worthy political intellectuals whereas today we have probably 0.
- JKCalhoun 4y ago
  In what forum today are politicians given an opportunity to speak/write intellectually? Sadly too, there has been for some time an under current of anti-intellectualism in politics. It is my understanding that Barack Obama, as an example, is highly educated, no doubt could engage in lofty discussions… that would be political suicide.
  - eternalban 4y ago
    > In what forum today are politicians given an opportunity to speak/write intellectually? That quote is from a letter from Jefferson to Madison. Barack Obama famously wrote a book. A "leader" leads by example. So I have a different take than your "sadly politicians are discouraged from thinking" and it goes like this: Patronizing and conditioning the political discourse to be at the level of 'high school civics class' is a powerful mechanism for keeping actual thinkers away from politics.
- snapplebobapple 4y ago
  Ron Paul. That is literally it.
  - blaser-waffle 4y ago
    the guy whose platform is going back on the gold standard and abolishing embassies to other countries? i'll give him credit for having a consistant platform and world view, but if he had his way we'd hand control of everything over to corporations -- and that's what his son is doing everything in his power to make happen.

rnk 4y ago

As we learned with Trump, there aren't enough limits on the president's power. Especially if the majority in congress just want to keep the bs power coming from their majority - they won't vote against them. The us constitution is vulnerable to the charismatic dictator trope. I wouldn't have believed it before Trump, but a lot of people went along with him because they thought they could stop him later, they thought he wouldn't go that far, they thought other people would stop him. But in our country, we need much greater limits on the president in law and the constitution.