I’m very worried about the US turning into a one-party theocracy. The actual institutional norms have been violated and the path has been laid. A very large portion of the country supports an authoritarian Christian theocracy as the future of America and it is terrifying. They are concentrated in smaller states that give these extreme voices outsized power in our current constitutional structure. I worry for the future.
A Constitutional Convention is closer than you think (2019)
31–40 of 123 posts
Re: A Constitutional Convention is closer than you think (2019)
#32Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you are on the left, imagine the new constitution specifically forbidding abortion. > If you are on the right, imagine it specifically forbidding private gun ownership. What if it became a 3/5s compromise sort of deal? No more fights over guns (we get to keep ‘em) and no more fights over abortion (women decide). We have that sort of today, but what if it were specifically enshrined as a formal recognition that e…
Ultimately, the only compromise that will ever work is a 10th Amendment style compromise where the decision is on a state by state basis. At that moment, people will get a lot more involved in local politics because national politics won’t matter all that much beyond national defense.
Which was kind of how the US was supposed to be designed. It’s exactly what the “right” wants as well, so it might indeed happen.
Re: A Constitutional Convention is closer than you think (2019)
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those flaws are pretty massive though. Legalising slavery and letting anyone and his dog own guns? That barbaric and doesn't belong in any constitution in 2021.
> Legalising slavery The original constitution did not address slavery until the passing of the thirteenth amendment in 1865 which made it illegal except as punishment for a convicted crime.
Article 1, Section 9 specifically prevented slavery from being abolished until 1808. The three-fifths compromise (Article 1, Section 2) also addressed slavery. The word never appears, but there are plenty of euphemistic references.
Re: A Constitutional Convention is closer than you think (2019)
#34If Prohibition could be passed in the USA, anything can be passed through the Convention IMO.
I think it's worth nothing that prohibition was passed as an amendment because they had yet to establish the judicial precedents that allowed them to do those sorts of things through normal legislation. As controversial as it was then we'd only need a simple legislative majority and presidential signature to pass something even more onerous today.
Re: A Constitutional Convention is closer than you think (2019)
#35An Article V convention is in my opinion the most thoroughly boneheaded idea in American politics (which is saying a lot). There is no way _at all_ to constrain the agenda _or_ the outcome per the current constitution. In particular you can’t say (afaik) “we are calling an article V convention solely on issue X.” The linked article describes this as the “runaway convention problem.” If you are on the left, imagine th…
I agree with you largely, at the same time this is designed to avoid a civil war. Aka if the federal government over reaches the states can reduce the central authority. All that said, to call a convention, you’ll need a super majority of states. Theoretically, that super majority would also be the ones deciding what goes into the changes. For one, you’d probably get that much needed clarification on the second amend…
Based on what evidence are we heading to a civil war conflict? I know partisanship is really high and such, but what recourses are failing so bad that we are heading into a situation that only armed conflict resolved?
Yes, some idiots tried to storm congress and extremism is a real problem, that isn’t an oddity of absolute occurrence. If the UK can avoid civil war even with persistent IRA bombings I think we will too
Re: A Constitutional Convention is closer than you think (2019)
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ultimately, the only compromise that will ever work is a 10th Amendment style compromise where the decision is on a state by state basis. At that moment, people will get a lot more involved in local politics because national politics won’t matter all that much beyond national defense.
Which was kind of how the US was supposed to be designed. It’s exactly what the “right” wants as well, so it might indeed happen.
It is not exactly what the "right" wants. Conservatives favor local control for some issues, but emphatically not for others.
Re: A Constitutional Convention is closer than you think (2019)
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those flaws are pretty massive though. Legalising slavery and letting anyone and his dog own guns? That barbaric and doesn't belong in any constitution in 2021.
> Legalising slavery The original constitution did not address slavery until the passing of the thirteenth amendment in 1865 which made it illegal except as punishment for a convicted crime.
[deleted]
Re: A Constitutional Convention is closer than you think (2019)
#38I would not trust the present day to create a viable constitution. It would likely be dominated by whatever party is in charge to perpetuate their specific platform rather than to establish principle based rules. The original constitution is really kind of amazing at how well it’s functioned. It has flaws, obviously, but seems really effective.
I'll take a crack at it. How about a two-person consularship with a red consul and a blue consul? Together they wield full executive control, but nothing happens unless both agree on a particular action. Would you ratify?
Re: A Constitutional Convention is closer than you think (2019)
#39An Article V convention is in my opinion the most thoroughly boneheaded idea in American politics (which is saying a lot). There is no way _at all_ to constrain the agenda _or_ the outcome per the current constitution. In particular you can’t say (afaik) “we are calling an article V convention solely on issue X.” The linked article describes this as the “runaway convention problem.” If you are on the left, imagine th…
I agree with you largely, at the same time this is designed to avoid a civil war. Aka if the federal government over reaches the states can reduce the central authority. All that said, to call a convention, you’ll need a super majority of states. Theoretically, that super majority would also be the ones deciding what goes into the changes. For one, you’d probably get that much needed clarification on the second amend…
> The “right” believes most of the regulations should be reserved to the states. I suspect instead you’d see an increased strengthening of states rights and a greater restriction on federal authority — which “helps” anti-abortion advocates but at also “helps” with California’s policies around Marxist policies.
They believe in state's rights in theory, but I'm not sure they do in practice. The right in the US has repeatedly sought national mechanisms to address issues that they would theoretically consider states rights (abortion, gay marriage, etc).
I'd also love to hear your definition of "Marxist" and how you believe California's state policies are Marxist.
Re: A Constitutional Convention is closer than you think (2019)
#40I personally think this is a great idea as a Constitutional Convention will be a free-for-all with no rules. We can then start from scratch on U.S. Constitution 2.0. With a new codebase, we can do a total rewrite, getting rid of bad lines, and not having to have that explicit patch for slavery to be included during every recompile. We can also clean up some dumb redundant code like the 18th and 21st Amendments. Shoul…
That would not work in actuality since a large portion of American politics is based on an extreme and literal interpretation of the Bible that is inconsistent with logic.