Forum Post: Do you desire for the US to be a Constitutional Republic
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 14, 2011, 2 p.m. EST by Rob
(881)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
as envisioned and created by the founding fathers?
Yes
There is much going on here in this movement, and much will develop from it. I wanted to give focus for one general idea.
New facebook page. Only one topic, focused maybe it can develop.
Get it started here..
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Get-Money-Out-of-Politics/170454236375392
Who are the founding fathers? Are you referring to the politicians of the day, who though celebrated now were among the last to embrace change and independence? Or the actual founders who fought to expel the crown in favor of popular political sovereignty?
I'd rather have a democratic republic where people rule themselves, than one in which a single set of general ideas are promoted as the final word, simply because they were written by men long ago. I don't need the bible to tell me not to kill. I don't need a constitution to tell me I have a right to speak my mind.
Research Thomas Young. He was more active than Franklin and Jefferson combined, but has been lost to reductionist revisionist history seeking to paint a militant libertarian face on an otherwise diverse and complicated time.
The Constitution affirms your right to speak your mind. Speak poorly of the Royalty in Thailand and you will spend decades in prison. Many, many other countries to not affirm this right and choose to restrict it to the point of death to the population. The revolution was not about 1 man and 1 persons ideas, it was through consensus that documents were drafted to make it clear what the United States stood for. History has been revised many times, it is nothing new, but when you have a document that is clear and has stood the test of time, it is unimportant who the players were. You may not like those who signed the Declaration of Independence, though by doing so signed their death warrants, and you may not like Jefferson as the primary author, but the foundation for our nation was written by them. There are always others playing parts that do not get the recognition that others feel they deserve, that is just the way it is. Those that signed the Declaration are the Founding Fathers as well as the politicians of the day. You must be political to form alliances, but perhaps you do not agree with the need for that. Had we not had alliances formed by Adams, Franklin, Hancock and the others, you could very well not have the right to speak your mind. This nation was created to be a Constitutional Republic.
Jefferson didn't even like the idea of a Constitution. "By what right does one generation have to instruct the next on how to govern itself?"
You seem to idolize the pop-founders, to whom is ascribed so much untrue legend, its almost frightening to think about where you may think this nation's political roots lie. The document is but a symbol of popular sovereignty. The revolution was fought, not to enshrine a doctrine of specific principles, but to throw off the shackles of a foreign rule and establish a democratic republic which is self governing.
This nation is not Ronco. and the USC is not a set-it-and-forget-it system of government. Remember the 3/5ths rule.
By the same token, John Adams felt that by having a population making demands is just as dangerous as a King. The idea of checks and balances was that the the House of representatives would be voted on by the population. The Senate was appointed by the governor of the state and the President would be a strong guiding influence. Adams feared democracy. We can play this game as to who said what as there are volumes of letters and quotes. in the end it was settled that the Constitution was the Law of the land With the Bill of Rights being the guide.
Why don't you be fair and list some stuff the government does today that Jefferson wouldn't like? Or would that include too many of your pet projects?
To be honest, I don't really give a damn what Jefferson, Franklin, Washington, Adams or any of them would like or dislike. They're men who've been dead for a long time, from an age that has now passed who dealt with situations we'll never really know about, who in the modern world would be lost.
If the best political or social thoughts a person can muster are the already recorded thoughts of others from long ago, they're simply avoiding actually thinking about the modern world or situations they're looking to address. You have no idea what a founding era civil actor would think or do today.
In theory, I would agree with you, but in a society filled with incompetent people who just want to loot everyone else, that's what we end up with. Very few people even willing to live and let live.
Why are you asking this question? Most of us here aren't crazy or stupid enough to want to scrap the constitution and start over, and the ones that are will be dealt with by the majority as necessary. We want to see a concrete series of changes to the laws of the land within the constitutional framework, almost all of which have precedent in the reforms surrounding the New Deal. As far as I'm concerned, what kind of governing system we have is not up for debate. Determining what we do with the one we have, though, is what OWS is about.