Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

September 17, 1787: "A Republic, If You Can Keep It"

nps.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 87 posts

Re: September 17, 1787: "A Republic, If You Can Keep It"

#21

Post by jdougan »

chasil wrote: post #6
orochimaaru wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe when this document was written, the only people allowed to vote were white males not in indentured servitude. The document was written by people who were actively amassing wealth. It doesn't mean its not a wise document but make no mistake about the people who were excluded from its initial benefits. The major benefit of the document was an establishment of a constitutional republic with the ability to modi…

As far as I would think, each state could set their own requirements for voting, and some ownership of land was also a requirement from what I remember. So Google suggested "who could vote in 1789” and the top result was from the Regan library. https://reagan.blogs.archives.gov/2022/03/29/road-to-the-vot... Reading... "The most common requirements for voter eligibility was that each prospective voter had to be a whit…

That essay is not well worded. They're confusing property in general with land specifically, with wasn't universal across the States. As I understand it, some States' property requirements could be met with non-land assets. See [1] for an interesting overview of the situation in New Jersey. The following quote makes no sense if property was restricted to land-only:

> Today a man owns a jackass worth fifty dollars and he is entitled to vote; but before the next election the jackass dies. The man in the meantime has become more experienced…and he is therefore better qualified to make a proper selection of rulers — but the jackass is dead and the man cannot vote. Now gentlemen…in whom is the right of suffrage? In the man or in the jackass?"

> -- Attributed to Benjamin Franklin, taken from “The Casket, or the Flowers of Literature, Wit and Sentiment,” 1828

[1] https://www.amrevmuseum.org/virtualexhibits/when-women-lost-...

Re: September 17, 1787: "A Republic, If You Can Keep It"

#22

Post by unyttigfjelltol »

vkou wrote: post #16
readthenotes1 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A friend of mine suggested that one for every 40,000 would be exactly the right amount of representation. Not only would there be much more accurate representation, and much more accountable representation, it would also be much more difficult to bribe enough

The reps actively seek bribes, because they need campaign warchests. Whether there are 8,000 of them, or 400, that dynamic isn't going to change. Also, at the moment the problem isn't bribes, the problem is that the tail is wagging the dog, and the Party will destroy anyone in it who dares to push back on the glorious leader.

I would put it like this-- politics is a business. Being good at that business sometimes is simply about vilifying your opponents or taking stubborn uncompromising positions on issues that cry out for cross-aisle collaboration. When you brag about it in podcasts and mailers, people send you money, and that is good business, regardless of public policy.

Re: September 17, 1787: "A Republic, If You Can Keep It"

#23

Post by themgt »

mullingitover wrote: post #14

This is very timely, and reminds me of George Washington pleading for Americans to beware party politics in his farewell address[1], where he willingly surrendered power and went home: > The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism.…

> The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop.

> Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence therefore it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.

Re: September 17, 1787: "A Republic, If You Can Keep It"

#24

Post by apercu »

orochimaaru wrote: post #4
jmclnx wrote: post #3

It is too bad the current crop of pols are ignoring all these documents and setting up to steal assets from working and poor people.

I believe when this document was written, the only people allowed to vote were white males not in indentured servitude. The document was written by people who were actively amassing wealth. It doesn't mean its not a wise document but make no mistake about the people who were excluded from its initial benefits. The major benefit of the document was an establishment of a constitutional republic with the ability to modi…

> The document was written by people who were actively amassing wealth. It doesn't mean its not a wise document but make no mistake about the people who were excluded from its initial benefit

Fair, but the document was written 200 years ago and society evolves....

Re: September 17, 1787: "A Republic, If You Can Keep It"

#25

Post by bobxmax »

mullingitover wrote: post #14

This is very timely, and reminds me of George Washington pleading for Americans to beware party politics in his farewell address[1], where he willingly surrendered power and went home: > The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism.…

Two parties, each controlled entirely by corporate interests ferrying out puppets for the populace to choose from

The American republic is failing in exactly the ways Plato and Socrates would've predicted it would.

Re: September 17, 1787: "A Republic, If You Can Keep It"

#26

Post by BuyMyBitcoins »

kiba wrote: post #17
saulpw wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if it were a two-tiered system, in which 8500 local representatives elected their set of ~435 national representatives?

I am not sure why you think thousand of representatives are inherently difficult to manage.

Consider that for each representative you add, each individual representative becomes less influential and has fewer opportunities to affect change. While I do believe the house should be larger, perhaps 600 representatives, once the house gets too large you simply won’t be able to allocate speaking time on the floor in a reasonable way.

The house would organize itself around voting blocs and certain representatives would naturally end up exercising an undue amount of sway because they control those blocs. With each individual representative having much less influence, they’d have no choice but to gang together to try and achieve something.

Re: September 17, 1787: "A Republic, If You Can Keep It"

#27

Post by vkou »

unyttigfjelltol wrote: post #22
vkou wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reps actively seek bribes, because they need campaign warchests. Whether there are 8,000 of them, or 400, that dynamic isn't going to change. Also, at the moment the problem isn't bribes, the problem is that the tail is wagging the dog, and the Party will destroy anyone in it who dares to push back on the glorious leader.

I would put it like this-- politics is a business. Being good at that business sometimes is simply about vilifying your opponents or taking stubborn uncompromising positions on issues that cry out for cross-aisle collaboration. When you brag about it in podcasts and mailers, people send you money, and that is good business , regardless of public policy.

None of that matters when the king wants your head for crossing him.

When given the choice between opposing Trump and making bad choices in governance, the people who did the former all lost their jobs, while the people who did the latter were all rewarded.

And that's how you get the current congressional crop.

Re: September 17, 1787: "A Republic, If You Can Keep It"

#28

Post by akio »

themgt wrote: post #23
mullingitover wrote: post #14

This is very timely, and reminds me of George Washington pleading for Americans to beware party politics in his farewell address[1], where he willingly surrendered power and went home: > The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism.…

> The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. > Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversi…

> So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith.

A key part.

Re: September 17, 1787: "A Republic, If You Can Keep It"

#29

Post by mmooss »

yibg wrote: post #19
mullingitover wrote: post #14

This is very timely, and reminds me of George Washington pleading for Americans to beware party politics in his farewell address[1], where he willingly surrendered power and went home: > The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism.…

Unfortunately people as a mass, don’t tend to learn from history. Or at least forget the lessons from history fairly easily. Maybe we are doomed to repeat the same historical lessons.

The US has been a 'democratic republic' for almost 250 years, so many generations have learned.

Such government has thrived in every culture and place, from East Asia to South Asia to almost all the Americas, many parts of Africa, Europe of course. Somehow, democracy works exceptionally well - far better than any alternative ever has - and is resilient.

... unless the people are somehow convinced that it is not, that it is not important, and they despair and give up.

Re: September 17, 1787: "A Republic, If You Can Keep It"

#30

Post by mullingitover »

themgt wrote: post #23
mullingitover wrote: post #14

This is very timely, and reminds me of George Washington pleading for Americans to beware party politics in his farewell address[1], where he willingly surrendered power and went home: > The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism.…

> The great rule of conduct for us in regard to foreign nations is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with perfect good faith. Here let us stop. > Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversi…

Sure was a simpler time. Now we have Russia pointing nuclear weapons at all our major population centers, and the engagements we have with a number of our allies against this nation are not being fulfilled, in bad faith.
Post reply on HN