5 ms·

I honestly don't trust people of the modern age, who would be in the actual position of making that happen, to do it without corrupting it even further than the

by LocalH 4y ago

I honestly don't trust people of the modern age, who would be in the actual position of making that happen, to do it without corrupting it even further than they already have through decades of bad law and bad judgment. Would you want today's politicians writing the Constitution?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
lapcat 4y ago
> Would you want today's politicians writing the Constitution? Would you want today's politically appointed Supreme Court justices interpreting the Constitution? There's no difference. From the article: "The Supreme Court created qualified immunity out of thin air in 1967, just six years after the Court first recognized that people could sue police officers and other government officials for violating their constitutional rights." Having said that, a new American revolution that abolishes the Constitution would also presumably, hopefully get rid of today's politicians too.
- Clubber 4y ago
  Most revolutions result in absolute dictatorship. See Russia, Cuba, Iran. We're quite the anomaly. Saying the constitution is obsolete really shows almost no understanding of the document itself.
  - lapcat 4y ago
    > See Russia, Cuba, Iran. Before their revolutions, Cuba was a military dictatorship backed by the US, Russia and Iran monarchies (the latter also backed by the US). So the starting points were not great, to say the least. > Saying the constitution is obsolete really shows almost no understanding of the document itself. I have higher degrees in philosophy and political science, so I think I understand the document pretty well, thank you. Ironically, a lot of the US Constitution was actually cribbed from a British philosopher, John Locke, who wrote 100 years before the US Constitution, which is now almost 250 years old itself. Imagine practicing medicine or science today based almost exclusively on 250 or 350 year old ideas.
    - amanaplanacanal 4y ago
      The starting point is always bad before a revolution. Otherwise nobody would revolt. Revolutions almost never turn out well from what I can see. Opportunists will try to step in to grab power, and the masses are easily swayed.
      - lapcat 4y ago
        > The starting point is always bad before a revolution. Otherwise nobody would revolt. Well, it's a spectrum. The OP refers to the American revolution: "We're quite the anomaly." But obviously the starting point here was a lot better than in Russia, Cuba, or Iran. > Revolutions almost never turn out well from what I can see. What would you say about America? Or England? Democracy has to be created and established somehow.
        andromeduck 4y ago
        A lot of those revolutions almost worked out though - and with a less educated populace. Though I suppose social fabric/cohesion matters just as much as education.

by LocalH 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

lapcat 4y ago

> Would you want today's politicians writing the Constitution? Would you want today's politically appointed Supreme Court justices interpreting the Constitution? There's no difference. From the article: "The Supreme Court created qualified immunity out of thin air in 1967, just six years after the Court first recognized that people could sue police officers and other government officials for violating their constitutional rights." Having said that, a new American revolution that abolishes the Constitution would also presumably, hopefully get rid of today's politicians too.

Clubber 4y ago
Most revolutions result in absolute dictatorship. See Russia, Cuba, Iran. We're quite the anomaly. Saying the constitution is obsolete really shows almost no understanding of the document itself.
- lapcat 4y ago
  > See Russia, Cuba, Iran. Before their revolutions, Cuba was a military dictatorship backed by the US, Russia and Iran monarchies (the latter also backed by the US). So the starting points were not great, to say the least. > Saying the constitution is obsolete really shows almost no understanding of the document itself. I have higher degrees in philosophy and political science, so I think I understand the document pretty well, thank you. Ironically, a lot of the US Constitution was actually cribbed from a British philosopher, John Locke, who wrote 100 years before the US Constitution, which is now almost 250 years old itself. Imagine practicing medicine or science today based almost exclusively on 250 or 350 year old ideas.
  - amanaplanacanal 4y ago
    The starting point is always bad before a revolution. Otherwise nobody would revolt. Revolutions almost never turn out well from what I can see. Opportunists will try to step in to grab power, and the masses are easily swayed.
    - lapcat 4y ago
      > The starting point is always bad before a revolution. Otherwise nobody would revolt. Well, it's a spectrum. The OP refers to the American revolution: "We're quite the anomaly." But obviously the starting point here was a lot better than in Russia, Cuba, or Iran. > Revolutions almost never turn out well from what I can see. What would you say about America? Or England? Democracy has to be created and established somehow.
      - andromeduck 4y ago
        A lot of those revolutions almost worked out though - and with a less educated populace. Though I suppose social fabric/cohesion matters just as much as education.