Am I the only libertarian who dislikes the American Constitution?

[Daktoria]

The "necessary and proper" and "general welfare" clauses are anti-social because they engage in psychological projection.

It has a lot to be desired.

 

[PrometheusBound]

A free and self-confident nation would view the Constitution as a temporary start-up document, superseded by every piece of legislation that amends it. Imagine if the computer had a Constitution stating that its original intent was to be used in secretarial work. Any expansion of its applications would have to be approved by a static tribunal afraid of progress and distracted from immediate usefulness by some irrelevant long term view. If turned down on expanding its use, the patent-holders would have to go through the long delay of the amendment process. We'd be left behind in computers, as we have become so backward in politics because of being pulled away from present needs by this obsolete document.

Those who support being tied down to the 18th Century worldview are like Fundamentalists narrowly judging right and wrong through absolute obedience to a primitive Bible written under the conditions of life in the desert.

 

[Dittohead not!]

A free and self-confident nation would view the Constitution as a temporary start-up document, superseded by every piece of legislation that amends it. Imagine if the computer had a Constitution stating that its original intent was to be used in secretarial work. Any expansion of its applications would have to be approved by a static tribunal afraid of progress and distracted from immediate usefulness by some irrelevant long term view. If turned down on expanding its use, the patent-holders would have to go through the long delay of the amendment process. We'd be left behind in computers, as we have become so backward in politics because of being pulled away from present needs by this obsolete document.

Those who support being tied down to the 18th Century worldview are like Fundamentalists narrowly judging right and wrong through absolute obedience to a primitive Bible written under the conditions of life in the desert.

and yet, the Constitution has been amended only a few times in the past couple of centuries. Why do you think that is?

 

[PrometheusBound]

and yet, the Constitution has been amended only a few times in the past couple of centuries. Why do you think that is?

It's designed to block the will of the people, demoralize them, make them apathetic about challenging their Constitutionally mandated lack of power, and strengthen the efficiency of control by aggressive unelected elites who choose pre-owned candidates to give the people the illusion of participation.

 

[Dittohead not!]

It's designed to block the will of the people, demoralize them, make them apathetic about challenging their Constitutionally mandated lack of power, and strengthen the efficiency of control by aggressive unelected elites who choose pre-owned candidates to give the people the illusion of participation.

Really? And you believe this, why?

 

[Harshaw]

I hold to a very... unique historical perspective. Essentially I regard Hamilton, Washington, and the Federalists as tools of Northern business interests, who at the time of ratification preferred a large, interventionist government to help them compete against the established pseudo-aristocracy in the South and to impose laws favorable to their business interests. I think a case against the Constitution can be made from both a progressive and a libertarian point-of-view.

Washington and most of the Federalists (Virginians, by and large) were part of the "pseudo-aristocracy in the South." How did you miss that?