this post was submitted on 28 Mar 2024
874 points (93.0% liked)

Memes

46423 readers
2703 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I'd vote for a candidate who campaigned to repeal the Second Amendment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 120 points 10 months ago (5 children)

Even Jefferson surmised it should be radically updated every few decades. I think he'd and many others would be pissed to realized we're all held hostage by compromises that barely made sense at the time.

[–] [email protected] 49 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Not only did they guess it should be updated; they even left plenty of mechanisms directly in the constitution that allowed for it to be updated radically whenever situations changed so drastically that a supermajority agrees that it should be changed.

Unfortunately that too is the downfall; as those who want to exploit the status quo are also empowered to leverage their money and power to prevent such a majority from taking place. The constitution is far from perfect, and it absolutely should've been amended many hundreds of times over, not just the paltry less than 30 times we've managed to do so already.

[–] samus12345 24 points 10 months ago (1 children)

George Washington was against political parties for the exact reason our country is being torn apart by partisan politics today.

[–] mipadaitu 21 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Sounds like he should have put stronger protections in place, and definitely shouldn't have tied us to a FPTP voting style. Even the electoral college and the 270 vote requirements force us into a two party system.

[–] samus12345 12 points 10 months ago

Yup, as was said earlier, it was known that the system would have to be overthrown over time as it became bloated and corrupt.

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

- Thomas Jefferson

[–] Stupidmanager 29 points 10 months ago

When a book of fiction is considered perfect and the word of god by more than half the population that supports this model… well, your answer is obvious. This works, for the “right” people, even though it’s very wrong. And half the voting population want to make it worse.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago

I think its interesting how the grifting right has moved away from the "Founding Fathers" to the "Constitution" because they know the fathers would see how shit's being run and be outright mortified!

"We never should have left the monarchy..."

[–] danc4498 2 points 10 months ago

It certainly feels radically different than a few decades ago…

[–] SupraMario 0 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Thinking our gov hasn't been updated means you're not paying attention. There has been a ton of changes since the founding of the country.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Yes I'm aware we have had some amendments. Ending slavery. Allowing women to vote. Direct election of Senators.

What about gerrymandering? Cap in the house leading to bad representation? The senate? I mean the senate still exists. States aren't people like people pretended they were. So much has not changed.

[–] SupraMario 0 points 10 months ago

There are tons of laws that circumvent amendments already, why do you think we need straight up amendments to the constitution to get things done?

[–] Wootz 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

But how many in the last few decades? When was the last amendment?

[–] SupraMario -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Amendments don't really matter when laws are created constantly that circumvent them.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You can't circumvent the Constitution with a law. That's the point.

Only with judicial capture.

[–] SupraMario 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Lol the fuck you can't, tons of amendments are constantly being circumvented. This is just plainly false.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

You should look up what judicial capture means.

[–] SupraMario 1 points 10 months ago

You're point was to say no you can't....then at the very end say well you can but.

I was commenting on the first part. And no it doesn't always require judicial capture for bad laws to be passed. Plenty of bipartisan shit gets sent through. It's not like the patriot act was just allowed through by on the red team.