-21 votes

Update A Very Bright Man Agrees, We (Ron Paul And Co) Need To Draft An Alternate Constitution Asap- Right Now! Not A Concon!

UPDATE: I just got word that a VERY BRIGHT man supports this idea. Here is his statement verbatim:

"I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical"

We are picking at 200 different pieces of a broken government. It has been so bastardized it resembles Frankenstein more than lady liberty. When my 91 Honda had more problems to fix than it was worth, I scrapped that mother fucker quick and got a Brand new car.

We need to stop squabbling and offer a brand new solution to the myriad of problems facing us, due to our warped federal governance NOW.

Convene a convention with Ron Paul, Rand, Massie, Amash, Grant, Woods, Johnson, et al this summers end and do what all great social movements do, offer a different solution. This will put us on the side of progress (buzzword) and status quo'ers on the defensive. It will also activate our collective brainwashing to 1. Support the underdog & 2. Put us playing the role of founding fathers and them the role of the King.

It won't hurt that we're finding the UK involved/implicit in this world domination scheme right now too =)

Btw. I'm fucking serious, this is the ONLY way out..



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

absolutely agree

if you want people to follow you have to offer a vision of what they are following

Creating a list of amendments to demand congress adopt is a good thing. Especially, if the public at large supports it.

But you have to start with a convention of sorts to define what to demand. A vision of what we want.

Except....

We DO NOT ask any congress to agree on this thing. We do not consent to our own oppression. WE DECIDE, individually. If enough passionate individuals decide for themselves, we have momentum. We DO NOT need 100% or even 50% of the people to agree to stop the current regime.

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

Wow... not an appeal to

Wow... not an appeal to authority to an unnamed "very bright man"...

I actually changed my initial down-vote to an up-vote just so I could have the satisfaction of down-voting this drivel a second time.

I'll give you a hint.

His initials are T.J.
and it's NOT Trader Joe.

Good luck!

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

Thomas Jefferson??

Have you been channeling spirits?

Because T.J. Hooker doesn't seem right...

Chance Favors the Prepared Mind.

Oh go figure, a statist

Oh go figure, a statist supports the idea of binding non-consenters to his power structure.

big surprise there.

Evan, please help.

I don't mind being disagreed with. But I am concerned when
1. the reality in someones head doesn't match the reality outside of it
and
2. that person blames their weird reality on me.

Please read the words, which I'm assuming you can, below and above. Then feel free to comment. Remember, I'm not FORcING you to do this, I am merely suggesting it. For the sake of us all.

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

Goal oriented

Suppose an agreement could be made among those who agree?

Does an example exist?

No

Yes

If you agree with no, then we two, out of some billions of people, or some hundreds of millions in these many States from New England to New Mexico, and from Mexico to Canada, on and on, a list.

If you agree with yes, then we two, or more, agree.

What is an example of an agreement among those who agree, and the agreement concerns the form that defensive government takes as defensive government is invented, produced, and maintained as defensive government?

No, do I hear many who say no, as aggressive wars for profit, torture and mass murder, is so good for "our" economy?

So, so, so, profitable?

No.

If the answer is yes, and there is an example, and the example is The Articles of Confederation, then why would anyone propose an end to such a Voluntary Free Market Government process as that someone proposed to Consolidate all those competitive Constitutionally Limited Republics into one Monopoly Power of Aggression?

Why do people, who won't be confessing, won't be raising their hands, won't be overtly agreeing, invest into Crime made Legal, such as that Consolidated Organized Crime Cabal currently operating the Private Corporation known as U.S.A. Inc. (LLC) in Washington D.C.?

Why do people voluntarily throw out Voluntary Free Market Government to replace Voluntary Association with Involuntary Association which is merely Crime being made Legal and hidden behind false flags, and false fronts?

If the idea is to invent, produce, and maintain, again, a Voluntary Defensive Power of such a magnitude of Defensive Power as to be able to defend, effectively, against all enemies of Liberty (criminals) foreign, and domestic, then why not look at what did work in the past, as that form existed, well enough, to be employed by those who were falsely called Rebels, those who merely defended Liberty, those who worked within the confines of Constitutionally Limited Republics, 13 in number at the time, as those States joined, voluntarily, into a mutual defensive POWER, under The Articles of Confederation? Why not look to see why it worked as a defensive power?

Why did it work?

If the idea is to consolidate all those sovereign powers into one Monopoly Power of aggression, because war is so damn good for your economy, then sure, do what is necessary, and make all your slaves bow down and lick your boots, while you kick them in their teeth.

If the idea, contrary to that idea, is voluntary association formed as a defensive power sufficient to defend against any enemies, foreign or domestic, then why can't you see that that was already done, at least once, in that voluntary association, or Free Market Government example, that existed between 1776, and The Declaration of Independence, and 1788, when Free Market Government was once again against the law.

No interest?

No usury?

No desire for agreement when crime is (so far) still so profitable?

Joe

Which one are we under right now, which would you rather have?

"Societies exist under three forms sufficiently distinguishable. 1. Without government, as among our Indians. 2. Under governments wherein the will of every one has a just influence, as is the case in England in a slight degree, and in our states in a great one. 3. Under governments of force: as is the case in all other monarchies and in most of the other republics. To have an idea of the curse of existence under these last, they must be seen. It is a government of wolves over sheep.....

....I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical. Unsuccesful rebellions indeed generally establish the incroachments on the rights of the people which have produced them. An observation of this truth should render honest republican governors so mild in their punishment of rebellions, as not to discourage them too much. It is a medicine necessary for the sound health of government." - Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, Paris, January 30, 1787[2]

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

The more you say "they'll never let it.. or we can't make "them"

The more you're usurping your own power and handing it to other men.

For clarification, Ms. Rand:

"I saw that the enemy was an inverted morality—and that my sanction was its only power. I saw that evil was impotent—that evil was the irrational, the blind, the anti-real—and that the only weapon of its triumph was the willingness of the good to serve it."

Let's come together right now, and stop serving evil. Stop consenting to it altogether.

This proposition is too fucking scary for me, it would be a LOT EASIER if I had SOMETHING TO CONSENT TO (something else I support and have a Moral imperative to). Therefore, when they come to kill me or imprison me, they are not imprisoning me for any evil whatsoever, they are inflicting violence on a man for not giving up his ideals. For not "Pledging Allegience (ie. willingly subserviating)" myself to them.

That alone, will show who is truly evil. I believe this would be no different than Tocamata in the Crusades (at least in Mel Brooks version of it) forcing people to publicly confess their will to the throne of the Pope or be killed. Except that we, as a species, would no longer stand for that.

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

Lol

This has to be a troll post. Our Constitution is fine Matthew. The problem is we do not adhere to it.

Good post.

I call ppl trolls all the time, it's cool.

Ok, so if it is fine why have things gotten to the way they are now?

I want this to be socratic, I'm not setting you up, I plomise ;-)

*Aside* Have you read the anti-federalist warnings? They seem pretty prescient to me and our current situation. They couldn't have predicted WWI, WWII, Isreal, the U.N., IMF, Federal Reserve, FDR, Bush, Obama, etc. Yet, by reading the document as it stood back then, they were able to see several, if not many of the terrible things that have come to be today in our System of Governance. -End Rant

p.s. I'm not calling for an "anti-federalist manifesto" here, just pointing things out.

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

Huh?

You point about adherence is well taken, and true. But how does this make it a troll post? Because you don't agree with it?

Ok I gotta call some people out here.

Guys(gals maybe too), you are sounding like those kind of people who spout the msm talking point when they read a headline that says, "Dr. Paul wants to legalize Heroine"

I am kind of shocked that so many of you have the same boilerplate response to this, despite that fact that I CHANGED THE TITLE, the content contradicts your false idea, and myself and two others have written clarifying commentary for the very same REACTIONARY IDEAS that others have already written.

So what is up?

Are you reading things fully and thinking....
OR
Are you recognize a 'hot button' word and REFLEXIVELY regurgitating some standard response that came from somewhere (probably outside of your own brains).

I'm not assuming you are, just pointing out a strange pattern I am observing on this thread.

Godspeed

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

Ok, so you want a new document?

Then just do it. Let's create an online process where the existing Constitution can be debated on merit alone, with a high level of consensus coming only from a rational agreed-upon logic for making any changes. Let this process work it's way through the entire set of founding documents in chronological order and we'll see where it begins to diverge from what we have.

I'm guessing it'll diverge most right after the 10th with only minor changes to it regarding equality of minorities and such.

Best of all, this not being any official legal process, you can make the results a spectacle for display. Maybe then people will see what we've been saying - that our Constitution is/was good up until the latter amendments.

I have my own opinions that any rewriting of a constitution or 'highest law of the land' should include human rights for all people, foreign and domestic. I feel that if we treated everyone the same, all countries would quickly equalize in any aspect related to the free market. Who knows, maybe that could eventually become the global document that says everyone has these rights and every 'state' manages themselves. Wouldn't that be disruptive!

Open Source Government

I recall reading something someone around here wrote a while back, about utilizing a very similar workflow that most open source software uses to develop governmental documents, using version control. It sounded extremely good to me. Anyone could see all of the changes to the documents and who made them and if there were conflicting changes, community leaders rise naturally based on the popularity of the real changes they make to the document. I don't see why this couldn't work as well for government as it does for software.

Ok I'm seeing this thing evolve...

Have a small committee of Learn-ed men meet and write a draft Governing Document, call it whatever the fuck you want.

Then set it free to be crowdsourced. Mabye have a WIKI like checks and balances. Reconvene a set time later with the original group, debate it, then ratify it. Set it loose on REDDIT, FB, whatever. Let people sign onto it. View the signatures grow.

Could signing it be a de-facto, personal, declaration of independence?

Hell, should we open this up to the rest of the world?

Free Market all the way?

I don't know, and I don't know technology that much anymore so sorry if I'm light years behind on terms.

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

Technically, it could work very well.

I was in on that discussion and it got hashed out pretty far down.

But practically, it would be rather tough to get implemented. In today's political environment, we can't even get a meeting with our reps, let alone have a say in an election or good grief, a government change.

And what's being discussed here is just one idea to create some awareness and see where that could lead. It's to create an alternate people's constitution which is more like a "People's Manifesto" or "Manifest-Popularis". Then it could be used to show that our current constitution, if actually adhered to, really is about the best way to go.

Mathew: Might consider putting something like this in the title to return some neg votes back to positive.

I'm not sure what you mean

Meetings with what reps? I personally do not have any representation in the gang that calls itself the "government".

No, this would be a new organization, one people would join voluntarily, which would bind only themselves and which would declare them independent from said gang.

I think it would end up being very similar to our current Constitution, with some exceptions, but in more modern, plain language (and a lot more explicit in certain things).

God damn right.

The founders had it, they were warned of some things (anti-federalists) they went ahead anyway and now we are here. Let's regroup, rewrite (update, if you will), reconvene, and re-allege ourselves to a New Noble document.

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

Help!

Gimme some specific words to use in the title that might help clarify/inspire.

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

Ya know, on second thought

This could be quite a valuable tool.

Assuming we created the genuine liberty, people's rights, state's rights and free market document that we all agreed on... and assuming we compared it to the original document(s) and showed where they differed... What would that say to the average person?

To me, it would ultimately lead to fixing the SCOTUS and stopping them from ruling out of constitutional bounds. For me, that is the only guaranteed way to fix our current government and it's the only substantive difference from my ideal new government so wouldn't getting more awareness on it be a good thing?

Bruddah,

You get it! And your suggestion to add human rights language is excellent! An all inclusive liberalism (classical) and it just so happens to fit MISES' conception of what a truly free market society looks like!

I am personally for a small group of our best and brightest to convene and come up with something quickly.

But the crowdsourced, evolving document might be more effective. In the very least it's more modern....

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

Me thinks

the crowd-sourced way is the ONLY way. Even knowing that your intention are PROBABLY in my best interest, it was still chilling to read your words, "I am personally for a small group..." It sounded like you wanted only your people, not mine and not the opinions of we the peeps.

Besides, the actual process of creating it, of debating it and of comparing it could be a marketing gold mine! By the time it's done, it could be a globally viral media frenzy. How much could that boost it's cred?

Do it both ways

The crowdsourced option is 21st century and has much merit. The small group option of the best and brightest to get things rolling follows the pattern of the Founding Fathers and has much merit as well. The main point here is to do something rather than discuss ad infinitum about how to do it.

Ok well

Feel free to put this out there to anyone with experience or knowledge.

I am not tech savvy, nor am I enlightened liberal philosophy savvy, nor am I legal savvy.

I am also a power hungry madman, which is why I feel I should have nothing to do with this actual new government should it arise :-D.

I say get the small group together at first though (not me!) together to create a light framework type document. Just for expediency purposes. It would be free to be updated as the 'users' (read humanity) sees fit.

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

I'm thinking you're not grasping the concept of crowd-sourcing

Don't try to organize this. Just start doing it. Open up a new comment thread and paste in a paragraph of the Constitution or and Article or Amendment and write what YOU would change.

Someone will argue it and someone else will suggest better refinements. Others will join in and it will evolve.

Someone else will do the same for another section.

Before you know it, it's a group effort. And before you know it, that group effort has been put online somewhere sanctioned for just it. And before you know it again, a crowd-source framework will build up around it.

Either all of this or you pay someone to write a perfected, custom web site with all the options for allowing the entire planet to join in, suggest, vote and not monopolize the system. Which sounds better and which sounds easier/cheaper?

Wouldn't "they" just love it

Wouldn't "they" just love it if we unlocked the constitution for them. They have proven that they can sell the most inane BS to the masses. Can you imagine the garbage they would come up with? Probably wouldn't even let Ron Paul in the door. The damn thing would be prewritten and approved in seconds.

Please

Stop giving "them" or "they" the power to control things in YOUR life.

*free life advice

NO MORE LIES. Ron Paul 2012.

Its not me I'm worried about.

Its not me I'm worried about. But i do worry about people who do not look at the potential consequences of their actions. You have your ideal situation, don't be blind to the logical possibilities.

On an unrelated topic, have you ever heard of a Trojan Horse? =p