4 ms·
I disagree entirely. The genius behind the the US Constitution was its acceptance of the idea that power, no matter how just, will eventually corrupt, which is
by jgg 13y ago
I disagree entirely. The genius behind the the US Constitution was its acceptance of the idea that power, no matter how just, will eventually corrupt, which is why our freedoms were supposed to be rather absolute. I think there are almost no sane reasons to infringe on a basic human right in general: the burden of proof should be on the government to do it selectively, and even then it should be treated with great scepticism.
Further, we have almost no power as a representative "democracy": the public can't recall a representative at all, for example, and it is only done by an internal chamber discussion (it has happened very few times in the history of the US).
Thus, we're really not supposed to "vote away" basic, sane axioms in the first place. The point of the US was to have those rights held firmly in place, and for its citizenry to use their right to bear arms to protect themselves against a government that tried to take them away. It's indicative of the US's culture at this point that stating this position (which is easily backed up by many of the founding fathers' writing) brands you as a "libertarian wingnut" or "on the fringe." Am I advocating violent revolt now? No, because most would not actually know what to revolt against (and probably don't perceive the corporate/government power structure in place in the US).
Then again, any attempt to do the aforementioned has failed in this country. A great example are the Alien and Sedition acts, which were passed conveniently around the time of the French Revolution.
- pnathan 13y agoIt's Christmas Eve, and I'm enjoying my coffee and feel rather disinclined to get into a political argument, so I'll just toss a few thoughts around without intending to respond (I'll chat via email tho'). I agree that increasing power should be treated with great scepticism (But it isn't, honestly. And that's a shame). Point: Police power is inherently a use of force on the citizenry. The Army is the same, loooosely. Point: Taxing, coining, patenting are all applications of force. Point: The 5th amendment clearly lines out uses of force. Point: The 5th amendment also includes a key phrase, "due process of law", indicating that the government is limited. The 3rd amedment supports this as well, requiring a limitation on quartering in time of war via law. Point: Law & regulations, period, are the application of the government's use of force to ensure a smooth governing (See Hobbes for a work known in the late 1700s). Conclusion: The US founders designed the government to have power (Unverified statement based on recollections - but split in such a way that each arm of government was naturally incented to limit the power of the other arms). Nit: The US is a republic, not a democracy. It's regrettable that a district can't recall its representative wholly on its own. Perhaps that would restrain certain foolishness in the system... Happy Holidays.
- snowwrestler 13y agoI meant to stay out of this but this is a pet peeve: the U.S. is both a republic and a democracy. The two concepts are not mutually exclusive. We're not a direct democracy, we're a representative democracy, but that is still a form of democracy. For an example of a democracy that is not a republic, see the UK. For an example of a republic that is not a democracy, see China.
- jgg 13y agoFYI, be careful what you post and respond to. I'm not sure if it was this comment, my many "Fuck the NSA" comments or something else, but it appears that all of my Internet traffic is now being routed through an EC2 instance in Ashburn, Virginia (which is very close to DC): http://i.imgur.com/IEcdqol.png http://i.imgur.com/IEcdqol.png I noticed it while getting a bunch of inappropriate 403 responses on basically any website, and my location kept showing up as "Ashburn, Virginia" automatically on weather sites.