Why some countries use such old constitutions?

[Memfis]

Seems weird to me, maybe because I don't know much about politics... Like the USA one is over 200 years old, isn't that a bit old? The world kind of changed since then, don't they feel the need to rewrite a lot of stuff?

[GreyGhost]

Memfis said:

Like the USA one is over 200 years old, isn't that a bit old? The world kind of changed since then, don't they feel the need to rewrite a lot of stuff?

A fair bit of tinkering has been done over the years, with the most recent amendment ratified in 1992, but for the most part - if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[geo]

There are growing pains here and there, but really America is do what the fuck you want, just don't hurt anyone either on purpose or with your own ignorance. There's always someone that intentionally or accidentally tries to fuck up the ability to do what you want.

[Cupboard]

The essential foundations which bind men together are irreplaceable. Constitutions serve an essential purpose, in that no future law can contradict the spirit of the original writing (subject to amendments). Constitutions always have to be updated! The latest US Constitution update was made in 1992 to amend congressmen's salaries to be fixed to the next term.

John Locke already defined nature in concrete terms. He came up with a term for a group of us. That is a government, a group of people who surrender our rights in order to gain ultimate privilege. That being the equal distribution of wealth to the poor, cultural sovereignty, security, free trade & equitable balance of power among nations, and others

[nxGangrel]

If the USA got rid of the constitution the power of federal Government would be stronger than ever. We already live in an economy worse than what the colonials fought against in the 1700's. The US constitution was supposed to be about actual freedom for individuals, specifically from the Bill of Rights, as well as balance and hold power together. (if there are any errors to what I'm saying please correct me if I'm wrong.)

Progressivism needs limits before it gets out of hand. The world will be royally fucked if the agenda of Feminists and SJWs for example is put in complete power.

[Cupboard]

You are already wrong in stating that the US economy is worse than the colonial economy of the United States. The US facilitates free trade across the globe, which delivers equitable prices and terms of exchange to consumers and producers. This economy is what has been deemed the "Knowledge Economy" by futurists. The US used to operate under a protectionist system in which the British Empire exacted taxes on all manufactured goods in the colonies, in effect everything went to a certain crown nation.

The US is already operating under a near-maximum amount of personal freedom. What needs to happen is a technological transformation that allows humankind to continue living, arm-in-arm, even though we may number 15+ billion in the near future.

[geo]

Yeah a lot of the constitution is to protect the people from the government. We have guns in case we need to overthrow our own government and army. We can say what we want as long as its not a threat. People have died for writing cartoons in other countries. Now we just edit them, no matter how classic they are.

We have the right to trial and to the judicial system. See just because the cops caught someone doing something doesn't mean they're guilty. Its a step by step process to ensure that you're really guilty.

America's system is so graceful and bureaucratic that it lets our people complain so much, because like myself with Oblige, its such a great system that you only want more from it.

American economy is a lot better than colonial times. Its laughable you'd think that, but I think you mean taxes. I know riots over 2% taxes. My uncle tells a story about how when gas went from 1 cent to 2 cents his father said it would ruin him financially and bankrupt the farm. Money is always an issue. People get accustom to their finances. Any change and they can't cope.

It costs a fuck of a lot of money to maintain a town or city. My step dad is a mayor as I've said multiple times here. I see what the prices are for things. For a police station, for salaries. His town has 2 policemen when his critics demand an entire police station and a police force of 12. He looks at the finances and says not at $50,000 a year per officer and $3 million for the proposed police station. His town hasn't raised taxes in 30 years.

[nxGangrel]

I meant the US Economy today is worse than what the colonials fought against. In other words, the British economy. Not the US colonial economy. But I get your point, somewhat.

[Maes]

Those countries using "such old constitutions" are the lucky ones. Old is good in this case, as it means the country was democratic/civil long enough to have a centuries-old constitution in place.

Those countries having more "modern" constitutions tend to be not very nice places to live in for a reason.

[Bucket]

nxGangrel said:

If the USA got rid of the constitution, we'll have done what Thomas Jefferson wanted.

Fixed that for you.

[Aliotroph?]

America: you can do what you want as long as rich conservatives let you. The USA really needs a better middle ground between police state and Jefferson's nonsense vision of a bunch of plantation owners with almost no laws. In striving for both it seems to display so many of the worst sides of conservatism.

[nxGangrel]

Bucket said:

Fixed that for you.

Is that a bad- You know what.. I never asked.

Aliotroph? said:

America: you can do what you want as long as rich conservatives let you.

Yeah because rich Liberals aren't a problem at all.

[Stygian]

I think the aim of the American founding fathers was to create a balanced system of government built on freedom and social equality and one that would resist radical reform. Having a written document that is both difficult to misinterpret and modify means things stay stable.

[Linguica]

Stygian said:

Having a written document that is both difficult to misinterpret

lmao

[Jaxxoon R]

Corporate lobbyists that are in secret creating a breeding ground for them all to battle to become a real world Shinra inc.

[Krispy]

nxGangrel said:

We already live in an economy worse than what the colonials fought against in the 1700's.

I have no idea what you mean here, but any way you can possibly interpret this sentence, it's total bullshit. The real GDP of the US has probably increased by at least tens of thousands of times since then.

[flubbernugget]

Maybe income inequality/gini ratio?

I read long ago from a history text book that since the main purpose of the bill of rights was to placate fears of the American people, their main reason for being picked was for ease of interpretation and lack of controversy, as opposed to the actual political power they granted the American people.

[Stygian]

Linguica said:

lmao

Okay, so maybe US politicians have made an art form of bending the laws to suit their own agendas. I will still argue that having laws be completely open to interpretation instead of written down is worse.

Jaxxoon R said:

Corporate lobbyists that are in secret creating a breeding ground for them all to battle to become a real world Shinra inc.

If the Trans-Pacific Partnership goes through, we will all bow before our multinational corporate shadow oligarchs.

[Fonze]

Stygian said:

If the Trans-Pacific Partnership goes through, we will all bow before our multinational corporate shadow oligarchs.

Too true.

Also, for the youngins, don't think that just because someone shares your party affiliation doesn't mean that they won't do the opposite. I'm a constitutional libertarian, so I typically vote conservative, but look at who's going along with the president on the trade bill, republicans. I have to give some credit to the dems in congress for opposing this bill, though they are also pushing for stuff that will hurt us... like the minimum wage increases (which some republicans support as well).

I have never worked for minimum wage, save when it has gone up. And yes, my first few jobs were minimum-wage-type jobs. Almost every job, save very small businesses and fast food, pays more than minimum wage already and gives out pay raises at least once a year. Even with a small amount of experience, plus a knowledge of what your time is worth, will save you from agreeing to be paid minimum wage. This is also why you look for a new job while you still have one, so you have some bargaining chips in your corner.

Keep in mind that enployment is an individual contract, unless you work for a union company, in which case it's a collective bargain (contract).

[fraggle]

Memfis said:

Seems weird to me, maybe because I don't know much about politics... Like the USA one is over 200 years old, isn't that a bit old? The world kind of changed since then, don't they feel the need to rewrite a lot of stuff?

Pretty much, yeah.

I'm not sure there are (m)any other countries with constitutions as old as the US's. It's pretty woefully outdated and probably still in place only because it's held up with an almost religious reverence.

[Doomkid]

^As a youngster, when I lived in the US, I got then ten commandments mixed up with amendments, because both are treated so religiously. I find that hilarious looking back..

[Cupboard]

As it stands right now, the US Constitution does need quite a bit of updating in how we run our elections. That is the first thing that needs to be fixed. Right now the whole thing is basically a media circus, with organizers grabbing at every dollar they can rustle up. Grass roots organizers get supporters in line and motivate people to throw money into this corrupt stew of political ineptitude. Both parties are so huge, encompassing, and corrupt that THEY CAN'T LIVE WITHOUT EACH OTHER. Their importance is so great because they are the only two "real" parties in the country. The political networks are so resistant to change that the whole root needs to be yanked out of the ground, and plant something new. There needs to be a national conversation among 3-6 parties perhaps, with a tight election cycle funded with public dollars. (would take less than 1/10 of 1 percent of the federal budget. Maybe it would take 2-5% of the discretionary budget, the budget that remains once you remove military spending and entitlement programs as "mandatory expenditures" [those already need a serious trimming, don't get me started, and I consider myself a socialist])

The first 10 amendments were a bargaining chip added in by James Madison to get the Southern and Middle States to agree to sign the constitution. Even though all these freedoms were enumerated in every state's legislature and already honored across state lines, those who opposed the idea of a federal government fought tooth and nail to preserve individual liberty (you have to understand the operating definition of liberty was only given to white men who owned property). James Madison (author of the Constitution) decided that maybe his whole idea of a national government with plans for a national bank system and a national infrastructure was a bit grandiose, so he said, hell, we can amend this document as often as we want to, but we need your commitment right now, all states need to contribute to a national realm.

[dg93]

Memfis said:

Seems weird to me, maybe because I don't know much about politics... Like the USA one is over 200 years old, isn't that a bit old? The world kind of changed since then, don't they feel the need to rewrite a lot of stuff?

The first 10 Amendments (as well as the 13th and 19th) of the US Constitution should not be rewritten or removed. The purpose of the US Constitution is to bring balance of power to the Federal Government, State Governments, and the people. We have three branches executive, legislative, and judicial for both Federal and State levels. We don't want one branch (i.e: Executive) to have total power like a monarch.

The Articles of Confederation was the original constitution of the US. It's purpose was to give individual states rights instead of having a strong Federal Government overpower them. These sovereign states would be like individual countries. I often wonder if the US would have been better off without the Federal System. Just a thought.

[Fulgrim]

When talking about the constitution I always feel that it's important to remember that in order for the constitution to have any real power, we have to enforce it. You can make all the amendments to the constitution you want, if it's not actively being enforced, it means nothing. Lack of enforcement is the entire reason that the federal government has over stepped their constitutional boundaries over and over again for so many years.

If anything it's time people stop being Democrat, Republican, conservative or liberal and simply start making a unified effort to enforce the constitution. The US and the world would be better off if we did.

Also, I think the TPP passing is a foregone conclusion at this point. People are too distracted over politics to form the united front needed to ensure that the TPP does not go though. Of course when it does pass people will try to blame one side of the isle while ignoring the fact that both sides signed off on it.

[Budoka]

I'm a constitutionalist as well, I'm afraid. It's important to have a set of principles with higher authority than the lawmakers, considering those are most untrustworthy as ordinary human beings given a special license to do very dangerous things. Or even as a safeguard against a misguided majority, for that matter.

Which is not to say I like theocracy any better, but that's were the advantages of a constitution-based monarchy/republic come into play: tangible, fixed values of a usually non-arbitrary kind. Constitutions should only be tampered with in the rare instances when their contents cause truly obvious problems.

Although my country's constitution may just need some tweaking, what with granting all sorts of current and former public officials special privileges with no justification and all that.

[Phml]

Two hundred years old isn't that old when you consider a growing number of people want laws according to two thousand years old books.

[Cupboard]

There you go again Phml with your Middle-Eastern philosophizing. Tell me why an AMERICUN would ever allow a sand person's perspective to change our founding fathers' way of life? [implying *facetiously* that the founding fathers wanted to create a Christian nation at all]

[Hoodie]

Yes yes this all very interesting.

You're gonna die soon.

[Avoozl]

Both versions of Jesus are terrible.

[Gez]

geo said:

Yeah a lot of the constitution is to protect the people from the government. We have guns in case we need to overthrow our own government and army.

Good luck!

Man I wish there was a perfect world simulator. I'd start "civil war" scenario in the USA and look just how successful a bunch of rednecks with guns would be at waging a war against a bunch of high-flying drones dropping JDAMs left and right, being fed tactical infos by the Twitter and Facebook streams of the rebellion's leaders and GPS coordinates from their cell phones.

I'm going for a scenario in which armed uprising is really justified, in that there really needs to be a conflict between US civilians and their armed forces, and not something that can be solved by waiting two years for the next elections. And man, it's darkly amusing.

You might point out that the Pentagon hasn't had much lasting success for its counter-insurgency operations in the Middle East, so they also wouldn't have much lasting success against an insurgency at home; but this forgets that 1. it'd be at home, so US soldiers would have a much easier time gathering intel and working with the non-rebellious population than they do in a country with a different language, different cultural norms, and a strong tendency to see westerners as decadent imperialist heathen crusaders; and 2. since in this scenario the US gov't has gone full Assad there isn't much considerations against putting "boots on the ground" here. The dictator doesn't need to balance between what's militarily efficient to win the war and what's politically sound as far as keeping domestic support.