The Constitution was a mistake.
It was a mistake that still could have worked out sort of OK, had the people been able to force the government-- against its wishes and self-interest-- to obey the Constitution to the letter.
They weren't able or willing to do that back in the early 1800s when that had a possibility of working. It's far too late for that now.
At this point, it would be unthinkably radical to make the feral government get back within the limits of what it is allowed to do on even just a few of its worst offenses. The only thing that might happen is to scale back the massive abuses a tiny, useless amount.
Don't count on even that.
And yet, those who believe they can get government back under control tell those of us who point out that political government must be abolished entirely, that our preference is impossible. They are in denial about their own preference's likelihood, but it's so much easier to point fingers and ignore reality.
I guarantee you there's a better chance of the US feral government disbanding than of anyone getting it back under control and within the limits of the Constitution. I'd love to be proven wrong, but that's simply the reality.
I need your support.
GMTA -- I hit "publish" on a very similar Garrison Center column (https://thegarrisoncenter.org/archives/19151) a few minutes before noticing your post.
ReplyDeleteIt's a situation that's hard to not notice unless you're blinded by the BS.
DeleteAll collective arrangements (scripted and initiated by elitist minorities who regard themselves as the ‘anointed’) to dictate how others should be directed and controlled are arrogant fictions. But while these are rarely manifested as written (in reality authority is usually expressed solely by the will and desire of the powerful) I don’t see these impotent ‘parchment barriers’ as the true problem. The actual and overwhelming difficulty is the subservient obedience of those who prefer to be controlled because they lack the individual character to assert their own self-propriety and instead submit to the servile safety and security of the slave. In a society with a majority of such people no foundational document or ‘supreme’ law, irrespective of its intentions, will ever succeed in protecting them from the wolves at the helm; such is not the fate or destiny of lambs.
ReplyDeleteYes. They would demand to be ruled (and demand you be ruled, too) regardless. It's a childish way to approach life.
DeleteI doubt if the Constitution was a "mistake". It was drafted with all due deliberation by a bunch of lawyer-politicians, and their priority was to create a FedGov with the least possible loss of State power.
ReplyDeleteBy the cunning trick of Marbury v Madison a few years later, the founders also arranged that ultimate authority rests not with Congress but with SCOTUS. That's a brain-twister that I tried to unravel at http://takelifeback.com/oto/091104.htm
Good point.
DeleteIf the creation of a centralized national government with the extent of its powers to be determined in the end by a branch of that very same federal government and supposedly ‘limited’ (sic) by mere words on paper, wasn’t a ‘mistake’ then it obviously needs a different but comparable adjective to describe it. If its intention was to create a central government with the least loss of the individual state’s power, then clearly the word to describe it is ‘failure’.
DeleteMaybe "evil" is the best word here.
Delete