4 ms·

Yes, see the FDR era and the threatening to pack the courts to change the interpretation to allow progressive reform. The reason why the thoughts of the people

by ty6853 2y ago

Yes, see the FDR era and the threatening to pack the courts to change the interpretation to allow progressive reform. The reason why the thoughts of the people that designed our government is relevant is not appeal to authority but to understand the rational to how it was designed the way it was. >democracy The whole point here is the Senate is not a democracy in a conventional sense, but rather distorted on weight of vote per capita.

mmooss 2y ago
20th century events are not evidence of your claim about 18th century people. And yes, of course it's not a pure democracy; I'm not debating terminology. The point is self-determination - Americans get to decide what their country is like. You don't get to impose what you want on them because you have lots of rationalizations.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- ty6853 2y ago
  ... the 20th century event was notable because it marked a change from the thought at time of founding up to then. You can ignore history but simply declaring it can't be imposed on you ignores all the inertia of a system only partially amended since the 18th Century (and amended using mostly 18th century imposed criteria). It imposes whether you acknowledge it or not, and no matter how soundly you might think your rebuttal it does zero to change that.
  - mmooss 2y ago
    > ... the 20th century event was notable because it marked a change from the thought at time of founding up to then. Can you back that up? The history I learned is of constant change. It's another 'appeal to authority' to say your way is the true way and therefore others shouldn't get to vote for their way. How about trying to persuade people on the merits of different options, and then they can vote?
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]