• Cornpop@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    Gonna just have to flat out disagree with you then. A large majority of it is still extremely relevant to our modern society. Sure it’s not perfect, but nothing is.

    • hoppeduponcoffee@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      19 hours ago

      Tell me the constitutional weaknesses and loopholes weren’t exploited to allow the oligarchs to hand power to a fascist traitor who doesn’t respect the law.

      What good is a constitution if it can’t even prevent the situation we’re in now?

      • Cornpop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        It’s more a failure of the courts then it is of the constitution. If it was upheld this corruption would not be permitted.

        • hoppeduponcoffee@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 hours ago

          The Courts failed because they were handed too much power in the first place. They’re unelected officials who are chosen by a partisan executive branch, so they’re the extension of the president’s political agenda and just as subject to corruption. If the President wants fascism, they can stack the Court to get fascism, and since there’s no term limits, we’re stuck with them for life.

          And since medical interventions keep these folks alive well into dinosaur age, that’s a long time to be stuck with a biased Court. That is inherently anti democratic.

          Trying to remove a legal document from the cultural zeitgeist in which it was created is impossible. It was designed from the ground up to abolish all limits on White property/slave owners and give them license to make money without repercussions. That included allowing politicians themselves to exploit citizens and their own positions for economic gains.

          The landed gentry of colonists were rebelling against what they perceived as economic repression, not repression of rights. Freedom to the mercantilist class meant freedom of economic exploitation.

          Our bill of rights doesn’t go far enough. It needs to be rewritten to exclude businesses as people, and protect the rights of marginalized groups. It also needs to address election reform, political corruption, and the complete removal of money from politics.

          If we instead lived by Hammurabi’s code, would that still work in the modern age?

      • misterztrite@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        You might as well as look for a new country because anything you have proposed is never going to happen. A line item is the only way anything is going to change. There is no way in this current environment a new constitution will be agreed upon.

        We could prevent could prevent a repeat of this situation by allowing the people to call for congressional and presidential snap elections and also having them to be able to recall their individual representatives. A way to deal with the supreme court would be to make the justices have to go through retention votes.

        Scalpel like changes that preserve the essence of the constitution are more likely to get ratified.