RE: Freedom and the American constitution.

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Freedom and the American constitution.

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Freedom and the American constitution.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Freedom and the American constitution. - 9/19/2007 2:22:01 AM

seeksfemslave

Posts: 4011
Joined: 6/16/2006
Status: offline

Well I always thought that the US constitution was framed in such a way as to try to limit the excesses of Monarchy, Aristocracy and Religiosity as existed at the time in Europe.

Maybe I am naive lol

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 41

RE: Freedom and the American constitution. - 9/19/2007 2:42:56 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: seeksfemslave

Well I always thought that the US constitution was framed in such a way as to try to limit the excesses of Monarchy, Aristocracy and Religiosity as existed at the time in Europe.

Maybe I am naive lol

It was a putsch seeks. There was no attempt to change the socio-economic system, it was a replacement of the ruling estblishment (the Brits, largely absent) by the establishment of the colonies. A securing of power that they largely already had. Look at the background of the founding fathers, they were all establishment figures and their aim, which was suiccessful, was to gain control. The constitution was a sop because it didn't spread sufferage any wider than it already was, in fact it could be argueed that there was less freedom for the ordinary colonist after the war than before. When the founding fathers talked of the rights of men, the term 'men' was limited to men in the their own class and not its universal sense. Look how Tom Paine ended up, so much for the value of his thoughts when they were no longer useful propaganda. In fact, the genius of the revolutionary establishment was their ability in propaganda.

Again the question of freedom is getting bogged down in arguments about the constitution which I admit is my fault, the OP could hjave been better worded.

< Message edited by meatcleaver -- 9/19/2007 2:46:50 AM >

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to seeksfemslave)

Profile

Post #: 42

RE: Freedom and the American constitution. - 9/19/2007 6:45:17 AM

petdave

Posts: 2479
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

ER..You do know that not a year ago an OECD report stated that there was less social mobility in the USA than in any other developed nation.

Nope.... i don't even know what OECD is

What did they use as their metric?

quote:

quote:

quote:

As for having no state religion, Americans have more religious interference in their politics than Europeans do.

Isn't Vatican City in Europe?

Er.. You do know that out of over 500 million people, only 2,000 people live in the Vatican City, some of them happen to be Americans.

Of course. i was just pointing out that the term "Europeans" encompasses people living under a number of very different political structures, which makes sweeping generalizations generally incorrect.

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 43

RE: Freedom and the American constitution. - 9/19/2007 6:55:37 AM

Pulpsmack

Posts: 394
Joined: 4/15/2004
From: Louisiana
Status: offline

I half agree with you.

Reliance that corrupt officials will slavishly obey paper commandments is foolhardy. What you miss about the equation is the way the system was set up (which is why the Second Amendment is so important). The Constitution is the list of what the government, federal (and through the 10th and 14th) as well as state can and cannot so. The teeth in that document comes (rather, is supposed to come) from the people. The founding fathers envisioned the people revolting against corrupt regimes on a constant basis. 20-25 years was the magic number. The problem is not the lacking Constitution. It is the people. Government is a constant... an inevitably corrupt mechanism. It is up to the people to assert their rights, and fight for them...with force if necessary. Americans are cowards now. They are sheep. The last so-called revolution was the civil rights movement, which was more than 30 years ago. The last true revolution was more than 130 years ago.

Everybody seems to abhor the Bush administration around here, but it amounts to little more than whining to the masses from the comfort of a Dorito-stained office chair in an air conditioned room. This is why freedom is dying. The constitution is law.... but we the people are the true enforcers of the law of the land, and we have been asleep at the wheel for decades (and at the current rate, decades more).

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 44

RE: Freedom and the American constitution. - 9/19/2007 7:22:57 AM

meatcleaver

Posts: 9030
Joined: 3/13/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pulpsmack

Reliance that corrupt officials will slavishly obey paper commandments is foolhardy. What you miss about the equation is the way the system was set up (which is why the Second Amendment is so important). The Constitution is the list of what the government, federal (and through the 10th and 14th) as well as state can and cannot so. The teeth in that document comes (rather, is supposed to come) from the people. The founding fathers envisioned the people revolting against corrupt regimes on a constant basis. 20-25 years was the magic number. The problem is not the lacking Constitution. It is the people. Government is a constant... an inevitably corrupt mechanism. It is up to the people to assert their rights, and fight for them...with force if necessary. Americans are cowards now. They are sheep. The last so-called revolution was the civil rights movement, which was more than 30 years ago. The last true revolution was more than 130 years ago.

This was the point I wanted to get at. The constitution might be a good constitution but a constitution doesn't define freedom or even guarantee freedom if it is possible for it todefine freedom. People are governors of their own freedom, unless they bequeath it to some piece of paper that is allowed to be defined by a political establishment.

I didn't want this to be a exclusively a debate about the American constitution, I used the American constitution in the OP because most here are American and with it being constitution day, I thought using the American constitution would prompt a debate about what freedom is.

< Message edited by meatcleaver -- 9/19/2007 7:23:35 AM >

_____________________________

There are fascists who consider themselves humanitarians, like cannibals on a health kick, eating only vegetarians.

(in reply to Pulpsmack)

Profile

Post #: 45

RE: Freedom and the American constitution. - 9/19/2007 9:01:37 AM

Real0ne

Posts: 21189
Joined: 10/25/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pulpsmack

Reliance that corrupt officials will slavishly obey paper commandments is foolhardy. What you miss about the equation is the way the system was set up (which is why the Second Amendment is so important). The Constitution is the list of what the government, federal (and through the 10th and 14th) as well as state can and cannot so. The teeth in that document comes (rather, is supposed to come) from the people. The founding fathers envisioned the people revolting against corrupt regimes on a constant basis. 20-25 years was the magic number. The problem is not the lacking Constitution. It is the people. Government is a constant... an inevitably corrupt mechanism. It is up to the people to assert their rights, and fight for them...with force if necessary. Americans are cowards now. They are sheep. The last so-called revolution was the civil rights movement, which was more than 30 years ago. The last true revolution was more than 130 years ago.

This was the point I wanted to get at. The constitution might be a good constitution but a constitution doesn't define freedom or even guarantee freedom if it is possible for it todefine freedom. People are governors of their own freedom, unless they bequeath it to some piece of paper that is allowed to be defined by a political establishment.

I didn't want this to be a exclusively a debate about the American constitution, I used the American constitution in the OP because most here are American and with it being constitution day, I thought using the American constitution would prompt a debate about what freedom is.

In these terms the constitution can be thought of as a reference point. It provides the framework and in effect the lowest common denominator of what people need to create a free society. "Ultimate" freedom in a governmental sense is nothing more than a world full of omnipitant sovereigns who understand in application that their rights end where another begins.

(of course no 2 people can ever seem to agree on that line)

So a constitution imo is not intended to "define" freedom but to provide a gateway to it.

The problem again as you said in so many words is that people equate the constitution as a "ruling force" much like a gun and feel they have protection as a result of its existance.

Nothing is further from the truth. The constitution like the gun is useless if it is left in the corner to rust and gather dust. At some point it wont work at all

< Message edited by Real0ne -- 9/19/2007 9:04:15 AM >

_____________________________

"We the Borg" of the us imperialists....resistance is futile

Democracy; The 'People' voted on 'which' amendment?

Yesterdays tinfoil is today's reality!

"No man's life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session

(in reply to meatcleaver)

Profile

Post #: 46