living document or fixed

[haymarket]

So did you have a point relating to the constitution being an agreement between the states?

So have you figured out how those areas of land and water manage to enter into these agreements in the first place?

 

[Federalist]

So have you figured out how those areas of land and water manage to enter into these agreements in the first place?

Have you figured out that a state is not a piece of land and water but rather an organized political community living under a government?

Do you have an actual point to make, or are you going to continue your childish trolling?

 

[haymarket]

Have you figured out that a state is not a piece of land and water but rather an organized political community living under a government?

Do you have an actual point to make, or are you going to continue your childish trolling?

I believe the word you have been furiously trying to avoid is PEOPLE.

 

[Federalist]

I believe the word you have been furiously trying to avoid is PEOPLE.

Okay, I say political community, and you say people. We are saying the same thing, since a political community is people. And these various political communities (or states) established the constitution between themselves. The constitution is a compact established between the states.

 

[haymarket]

Okay, I say political community, and you say people. We are saying the same thing, since a political community is people. And these various political communities (or states) established the constitution between themselves. The constitution is a compact established between the states.

Between the American people of the states.

 

[Federalist]

Between the American people of the states.

"The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same."

 

[haymarket]

"The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same."

well since we are now going backwards ............. so how did those plots of land accomplish that?

 

[Federalist]

well since we are now going backwards ............. so how did those plots of land accomplish that?

A state is not a plot of land. A state is an organized political community living under a government. These several political communities, or states, established the constitution between themselves. What do you find so difficult to understand about this?

 

[haymarket]

A state is not a plot of land. A state is an organized political community living under a government. These several political communities, or states, established the constitution between themselves. What do you find so difficult to understand about this?

You really hate the term THE PEOPLE don't you?

 

[Federalist]

You really hate the term THE PEOPLE don't you?

No, I don't. Why do you think that I do? We have already agreed that the people of the several states established the constitution between their respective states. What is your problem/issue with this?

 

[Eric651]

The US Constitution is an interesting discussion these days because it is basically a moot discussion. Although we have not completely abandoned it, we currently ignore a significant part of our founding document. The US Constitution was written to establish and limit the power of the federal government. It is not a living document but it is one that can be amended.

 

[haymarket]

No, I don't. Why do you think that I do? We have already agreed that the people of the several states established the constitution between their respective states. What is your problem/issue with this?

It is because you seem to think of STATES as some sort of entity in and of themselves that is separate and apart from the people who make up those states.

 

[Federalist]

It is because you seem to think of STATES as some sort of entity in and of themselves that is separate and apart from the people who make up those states.

That must be due to a failure in my ability to communicate, because I agree with you that states have no existence in reality and are nothing more than the name we use to describe an organized political community living under a government. These several communities, or states, entered into a compact when they established the constitution between themselves. That is the nature of a federation. It establishes an organization whose members are separate political communities.

 

[PrometheusBound]

Article 7 of the constitution:

"The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same."

The state conventions were also tiny elites; they did not substitute for the people of their states, which I consider to be the meaning of "states," not the political elite that you assign that designation to. These state elites also got the right to appoint Senators instead of having them elected by the despised people.

 

[PrometheusBound]

Thomas Jefferson, Opinion against the constitutionality of a National Bank (1791)

This is the centerpiece of the intent of the founders regarding limited government, expressed into the Constitution.

Notice the implication of the Constitutional phrasing "to the States or to the people." The States are not the people, they are a tiny elite of pre-owned politicians. Like lawyers, which many of them are, they are a united group that pretends to take one side or the other in order to fool the people into thinking that there is any real choice when picking between isolated conceited know-it-alls.

 

[PrometheusBound]

Have you figured out that a state is not a piece of land and water but rather an organized political community living under a government?

Do you have an actual point to make, or are you going to continue your childish trolling?

The only way to make them an "organized political community" is to allow the electorate to vote on the issues rather than on some pre-owned candidates. As with all Constitutionalists, you want to create imaginary political rights and powers that are impossible under your sacred document. What Americans are stuck with is more like the sports-fan "community," which has little say over how "their" teams are run.

 

[PrometheusBound]

You really hate the term THE PEOPLE don't you?

Of course he does. To Constitutionalists, "the people" means "mob rule," while they want Snob Rule. Their contempt for the majority is nothing but treason. It was a "mob" that settled our frontier. It was a "mob" that built our industries. It was a "mob" that died on the beaches of Normandy.

 

[haymarket]

Very well said.

 

[Federalist]

The state conventions were also tiny elites; they did not substitute for the people of their states, which I consider to be the meaning of "states," not the political elite that you assign that designation to. These state elites also got the right to appoint Senators instead of having them elected by the despised people.

Does the fact that small groups from each state established the current federal government render said government illegitimate, in you opinion?

 

[Federalist]

The only way to make them an "organized political community" is to allow the electorate to vote on the issues rather than on some pre-owned candidates.

Would you prefer for your state to be a direct democracy rather than a representative republic? Even the least populous state in the union has roughly a half a million people. Would direct democracy work on such a scale?

As with all Constitutionalists, you want to create imaginary political rights and powers that are impossible under your sacred document. What Americans are stuck with is more like the sports-fan "community," which has little say over how "their" teams are run.

Not really. I see a constitution as representing the ground rules for a political community, describing what sorts of actions may and may not be undertaken through the political means.

 

[Federalist]

Of course he does. To Constitutionalists, "the people" means "mob rule," while they want Snob Rule. Their contempt for the majority is nothing but treason. It was a "mob" that settled our frontier. It was a "mob" that built our industries. It was a "mob" that died on the beaches of Normandy.

Of course I don't hate the term "the people". I am simply pointing out that the constitution is not an compact between the American people at large but a compact between the states. They sent state delegates, they signed off on the document as states, and they ratified the compact in state conventions. The constitution is clear that it is being established between the states.

"The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same."

 

[PrometheusBound]

Does the fact that small groups from each state established the current federal government render said government illegitimate, in you opinion?

Yes. "We the People" should be taken literally, to mean, "We the people who are signing this document, not we the American people." Even if they were the best men of their times and served the people's interest, they established an elitist structure that could only be beneficial if the future politicians it empowered were just like the Founding Fathers. Didn't happen.

 

[PrometheusBound]

Would you prefer for your state to be a direct democracy rather than a representative republic? Even the least populous state in the union has roughly a half a million people. Would direct democracy work on such a scale?


Not really. I see a constitution as representing the ground rules for a political community, describing what sorts of actions may and may not be undertaken through the political means.

Voting is as easy as selecting a TV channel. The elitist representative system doesn't work for the right people. It creates powerlessness, humiliation, alienation, and apathy among the majority of people, the only ones it has a right to work for. It excludes the "political community" and reduces us into becoming spectators forced to cheer for others who are the only players. No wonder the crowds are dwindling and people lose interest because only special interests are in the game. It's not for the millions, it's only for the millionaires.

 

[Federalist]

Yes. "We the People" should be taken literally, to mean, "We the people who are signing this document, not we the American people." Even if they were the best men of their times and served the people's interest, they established an elitist structure that could only be beneficial if the future politicians it empowered were just like the Founding Fathers. Didn't happen.

That is an interesting take on things. So the constitution would apply only to the small group of people who signed and ratified it, and it would not apply to any other people in America.

Well that certainly puts a concrete spin on the term "government by the consent of the governed", as only those who explicitly voluntarily sign onto the constitution would be bound by its terms. So is it your opinion that imposing the terms of the constitution upon those who didn't sign it is somehow unfair or illegitimate?

 

[Diogenes]

Voting is as easy as selecting a TV channel. The elitist representative system doesn't work for the right people. It creates powerlessness, humiliation, alienation, and apathy among the majority of people, the only ones it has a right to work for. It excludes the "political community" and reduces us into becoming spectators forced to cheer for others who are the only players. No wonder the crowds are dwindling and people lose interest because only special interests are in the game. It's not for the millions, it's only for the millionaires.

Do you feel powerless? Humiliated? Alienated? Apathetic? Do you attend city council meetings? Do you attend county commission meetings? Do you contribute to your community in any way?