I'd argue the constitutional republic as designed hasn't existed for at least 100 years, likely longer. It was supposed to be a state-dominant government. So if California wanted to fly the fag flag and Texas wanted to ban it, sure, fine. It keeps changing so some states can use the federal government to force others to comply.
Even after all the civil war stuff, the amendments passed in the early 20th century, they are terrible.
16th: federal income taxes -- removed the ability for each state to figure out how to levy taxes, allows growth of federal government due to being able to directly fund itself
17th: direct election of senators -- now states can't decide that on their own
19th: women voting -- states could have decided that by state, it was never prohibited to allow women to vote
23rd: DC getting electors -- not a state, federal district gets a say now
24th: poll tax -- again, should be up to the states
26th: voting age -- also should be up to the states
Don't get me wrong, I still think the US did way better in everything you mention because of the Constitution. I just argue to anyone going on about the failed "constitutional republic" is we barely have much of it left.
I suppose then that begs the question: Did those amendments pass because of an intrinsic weakness in the constitutional republic model that other models of government would be more resilient to?
I've thought about that, but never read into it. There is some sort of weakness for sure. Having not lived through an amendment really (I suppose the 27th), it's hard for me to say, just because I don't know how the landscape and the feelings of the actual people were when they were ratified. The 26th makes some sense to me, with that being during the whole Vietnam draft, albeit it didn't really work to stop America being the world empire anyway.
I mean if I were to be given perfection, I'll take a benevolent dictator. But good luck making that happen and actually work. Second to that, I still think the US is better off than moth.
I agree with you, but with the benefit of hindsight I bet there are a few more things the founding fathers would have spelled out in inarguable black and white.
I also think that no system of government is suitable for all periods of history. Right now I think America may well benefit from a Caesar brushing aside the fat and happy elite.
The founding fathers explicitly said when the government shows it's nature, burn it down and rebuild stronger, using the constitution. There are many kinds of failsafes people have come up with to prevent the exact corruption we see now, that can only be implemented when you restart from the base again. We are in the "leadup to war" period.
The problem with that is that we would need someone with the benevolence and care that Caesar had for Rome combined with his will and tactical prowess to do what needed to be done. There is an abundance of people with either of those, but rarely both.
What we need is essentially a hybrid between Javier Milei, Ron Paul, and Napoleon. We pretty much need God Emperor Atreides at this point. Trump, for all the good he has done, is nowhere near the caliber of man required to save this country from its current course.
If I recall correctly, part of this goes back to the Federalists. I'm almost positive it's one of the main reasons Alexander Hamilton has been thrust forward with that godforsaken musical in Broadway.
Jefferson on the other hand was a member of the Democratic-Republican Party, who wanted to return back to the free state model. "liberalism, republicanism, individual liberty, equal rights, decentralization, free markets, free trade, agrarianism, and sympathy with the French Revolution"
"But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist."
The implementation of universal suffrage was the death knell, and FDR's stacking of the supreme court with goons that were all aboard the "expand federal powers" agenda was the final blow. But what really started it was Lincoln deciding states weren't allowed to leave.
Yeah the wehraboo faggots constantly trying to subvert the right are not, and have never been patriotic americans or right wing. They're just another flavor of leftist grubbling for power to give to their sociopaths, and promoted by the feds as a psyop. Every last one deserves the woodchipper.
The founding fathers knew every government is imperfect. The US was built knowing it would fail, and designed to allow for revolution. The US government is meant to be an iterative design - when it inevitably turns to tyranny, tear it down and put in more safeguards for the next version. They talked about this concept in their writings. Our system is not perfect, but it is still the best system humanity has seen. It failing as all things do is no excuse to reject the principles it was built on and pivot hard left like the useless faggots want.
You know why they're pushed so hard? All leftism serves globalist goals. The real sociopaths at the top do not actually care which dogma they have to pretend to serve, only that power is concentrated. Centralized power is what they want, because they will always subvert it.
You nailed it. People crying about the constitution not being totally fail safe are children. Everything eventually falls to entropy, and requires constant upkeep to continue working. Government is no different. Its still very easy to see how the constitution has kept the ideas of liberty alive in peoples minds, so that we arent nearly as overrun as the rest of the developed world.
I'd argue the constitutional republic as designed hasn't existed for at least 100 years, likely longer. It was supposed to be a state-dominant government. So if California wanted to fly the fag flag and Texas wanted to ban it, sure, fine. It keeps changing so some states can use the federal government to force others to comply.
Even after all the civil war stuff, the amendments passed in the early 20th century, they are terrible.
Don't get me wrong, I still think the US did way better in everything you mention because of the Constitution. I just argue to anyone going on about the failed "constitutional republic" is we barely have much of it left.
I suppose then that begs the question: Did those amendments pass because of an intrinsic weakness in the constitutional republic model that other models of government would be more resilient to?
I've thought about that, but never read into it. There is some sort of weakness for sure. Having not lived through an amendment really (I suppose the 27th), it's hard for me to say, just because I don't know how the landscape and the feelings of the actual people were when they were ratified. The 26th makes some sense to me, with that being during the whole Vietnam draft, albeit it didn't really work to stop America being the world empire anyway.
I mean if I were to be given perfection, I'll take a benevolent dictator. But good luck making that happen and actually work. Second to that, I still think the US is better off than moth.
I agree with you, but with the benefit of hindsight I bet there are a few more things the founding fathers would have spelled out in inarguable black and white.
I also think that no system of government is suitable for all periods of history. Right now I think America may well benefit from a Caesar brushing aside the fat and happy elite.
The founding fathers explicitly said when the government shows it's nature, burn it down and rebuild stronger, using the constitution. There are many kinds of failsafes people have come up with to prevent the exact corruption we see now, that can only be implemented when you restart from the base again. We are in the "leadup to war" period.
The problem with that is that we would need someone with the benevolence and care that Caesar had for Rome combined with his will and tactical prowess to do what needed to be done. There is an abundance of people with either of those, but rarely both.
What we need is essentially a hybrid between Javier Milei, Ron Paul, and Napoleon. We pretty much need God Emperor Atreides at this point. Trump, for all the good he has done, is nowhere near the caliber of man required to save this country from its current course.
If I recall correctly, part of this goes back to the Federalists. I'm almost positive it's one of the main reasons Alexander Hamilton has been thrust forward with that godforsaken musical in Broadway.
Jefferson on the other hand was a member of the Democratic-Republican Party, who wanted to return back to the free state model. "liberalism, republicanism, individual liberty, equal rights, decentralization, free markets, free trade, agrarianism, and sympathy with the French Revolution"
To be honest, that doesn’t exactly sound good either.
Irrelevant.
"But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist."
The implementation of universal suffrage was the death knell, and FDR's stacking of the supreme court with goons that were all aboard the "expand federal powers" agenda was the final blow. But what really started it was Lincoln deciding states weren't allowed to leave.
Yeah the wehraboo faggots constantly trying to subvert the right are not, and have never been patriotic americans or right wing. They're just another flavor of leftist grubbling for power to give to their sociopaths, and promoted by the feds as a psyop. Every last one deserves the woodchipper.
The founding fathers knew every government is imperfect. The US was built knowing it would fail, and designed to allow for revolution. The US government is meant to be an iterative design - when it inevitably turns to tyranny, tear it down and put in more safeguards for the next version. They talked about this concept in their writings. Our system is not perfect, but it is still the best system humanity has seen. It failing as all things do is no excuse to reject the principles it was built on and pivot hard left like the useless faggots want.
You know why they're pushed so hard? All leftism serves globalist goals. The real sociopaths at the top do not actually care which dogma they have to pretend to serve, only that power is concentrated. Centralized power is what they want, because they will always subvert it.
You nailed it. People crying about the constitution not being totally fail safe are children. Everything eventually falls to entropy, and requires constant upkeep to continue working. Government is no different. Its still very easy to see how the constitution has kept the ideas of liberty alive in peoples minds, so that we arent nearly as overrun as the rest of the developed world.