ok there tankies, next youre gonna try to tell me that a system that uses 9 unelected wizards to determine who has rights somehow doesn’t make sense 
this post was submitted on 01 Feb 2025
99 points (96.3% liked)
El Chisme
321 readers
203 users here now
Place for posting about the dumb shit public figures say.
Rules:
Rule 1: The subject of a post must be a public person.
Rule 2: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 3: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 4: No sectarianism.
Rule 5: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 6: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 7: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 8: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
The constitution is infallible and perfect which is why half its writers argued about how to interpret their own document for the rest of their lives and also all your rights come from amendments
Imagine caring this much about the constitution, a document created by the planter aristocracy.
The purpose of a system is what it does
If the rule you followed brought you to this, of what use was the rule?
I think it comes from our roots in common law but, wherever it comes from, this whole system of shit being based on precedent and not actually codifying shit is dumb as fuck. Like even the Hallowed righteous supreme Court only has it's power of judicial review because John Marshall just did that. Which shouldn't be surprising because we are the only country with this type of paper worship. In a functional state you update things, you don't pride yourself on being ruled by norms set down by centuries-dead assholes.
My pet theory is that it's all unintentionally a byproduct of the myth making involved in the country. Like it's all part of these unwritten rules designed to confuse and obfuscate processes but they have to base it on a bunch of hokey anecdotes and storytelling to make it seem more legitimate.
So invariably there's some unwritten rule about wagon wheels or some bullshit story of Senator Cornbutton's Acorn Shells involved that nobody should know or care about while trying to run a government. And all that theater conveniently employs a whole troupe of reporters and "experts" who can explain why, because of the gauge of 19th century boot laces, we can't have universal healthcare
And all that theater conveniently employs a whole troupe of reporters and "experts" who can explain why, because of the gauge of 19th century boot laces, we can't have universal healthcare.
Reminds me of the Catholic Church keeping their monopoly on salvation by forbidding the Bible to be translated.
US law actually seems quite a bit more codified than other jurisdictions, it just doesn't seem like it because Congress is a completely broken vacuum of new law
Making one guy the head of state, head of government, and commander in chief of the armed forces, is an incredible amount of power to invest in an executive. I'm begging libs to do some very basic comparative politics, and sus out whether this "avoid Centralization" thing makes any sense
real capitalism has never been tried
avoid centralized power
It creates centralized power because the first one didn't centralize anything and it was a disaster. It was just a bunch of wealthy fucks screwing each other over and too much competition between states. They needed federalization to stabilize the ownership of production so that it wouldn't interrupt production.
True libertarianism has never been tried, either.
Maybe having a constitution that practically forces a two-party system is the actual problem here and everything else is just a consequence of that, or does this not count as a failure?
In the sort of opposite of disco elysiums inframaterialism I get the strong feeling a lot of people see whatever constitution or similar thing you have in your western democratic as somehow entirely removed from everything else
ShutthefuckupShutthefuckupShutthefuckupShutthefuckupShutthefuckupShutthefuckupShutthefuckup
The second method will be exemplified in the federal republic of the United States. Whilst all authority in it will be derived from, and dependent on the society, the society itself will be broken into so many parts, interests, and classes of citizens, that the rights of individuals, or of the minority, will be in little danger from interested combinations of the majority. - Madison, 1788
RESPECT THE OLD PAPER! IT SAYS YOU MUST!