Comment: I don't practice hagiography

(See in situ)

I don't practice hagiography

The founding fathers also enshrined slavery in the original text of the Constitution. Jefferson was for the rewriting/reconfirmation of the Constitution every 20 years. However, with respect to that potential solution, the process would quickly be co-opted, and tyranny would be progressed further at each interval.

I disagree that government is a "necessary evil."

Let's just face the reality that even with the Constitution, this is what we've devolved into. What would it be like without such a document?

This question can only be answered with pure speculation. One thing that can be said, however, is that repeating failed solutions and expecting different results wouldn't say much for the sanity of mankind.

History shows us that it would simply be chaos: Regional warlords fighting other regional warlords for supremacy. That is a greater evil than simply having a Constitution, and a Rule of Law. This is the Golden Mean, as Nelson puts it - between Totalitarianism and Anarchy as used in its popular sense, which (for a reason) means chaos.

Anarchy means chaos just as legitimately as collect means Clapper's definition. It's in the interest of those in power to portray anarchy as a horrible state of existence. In reality, without government, cartel arrangements would soon fail, leaving no room schemes like central banking. That's the reason anarchy has been redefined to mean chaos over the years.

Of what history do you refer, the not so Wild West? Demonstrate to me, historically, where a well-armed populace devolved into "prehistoric savagery." Only where weapons are expensive and/or hard to come by can "regional warlords" gain a pseudo-monopoly on force.

I take it you're not an Anarchist.

I think we should aspire to anarchy. I think we should rollback the state as much as the population will tolerate until none is left, and people realize that voluntary association is a superior answer. I'm like Rothbard in this respect, "If a button existed to abolish the state, I'd blister my finger pressing the damn thing." (paraphrasing)

It takes eternal vigilance . Have the people of this nation been eternally vigilant?

It's idealistic to suggest eternal vigilance exists, and it's intellectually dishonest to say that it's O.K. to violate the rights of those people that are preoccupied with everyday life. Eternal vigilance cannot and never will exist. For that reason, governments will always devolve to tyranny.

But I propose that in absence of our Constitution, things would most certainly be worse.

Again, this is entirely speculation. I disagree, but that is speculation also; however, the Early American West leads me to believe that my speculation is more rightly founded.