You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
2

[–] Malek 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

The Articles of Confederation were complete shit. People were in open rebellion against the Federal Government because they didn't get paid for their military service. Completely depending on the states for revenue without any power was a horrible idea.

I agree that the Jeffersonians were correct in adding a Bill of Rights but they brought no other alternatives to the table. The current system was not working and Hamilton, Jay, and Madison brought an idea that could have worked.

0
0

[–] Gamerdog6482 ago 

The Articles failed because they relied upon the states to raise revenue, and the states didn't and couldn't do that.

In a modern, industrialized world it could easily be pulled off. Hell, the European Union was heavily influenced by the AoC, so it's not impossible.

0
0

[–] antiplebbitor ago 

In a true negative-liberty document, enumeration of positive-rights is not only futile, but self-defeating. Why list explicit rights if the people retain all rights except those explicit powers granted to government?

I love the Constitution of the United States of America, but the Amendments are pretty shit in the negative-liberty sense. They also provide room for tyrants to erode those vast, expansive rights which are not explicitly/positively included...

0
0

[–] Malek ago 

Da Fuq you talking about? There is always an exception to every right enumerated to in the Constitution. Additional, there is right that is NOT expressively enumerated in the Constitution. It is considered to be in the Penumbra of the Constitution. The Supreme Court, those tyrants that they are, added a new right to the Constitution, privacy.

Furthermore, all power not given to the Federal Government is retained by the states, not the people. People don't govern anything, elected officials govern.

I go back to why the Jeffersionians lost and the Federalists won. What is your alternative? Do you have a better solution?