Our sometimes flagrant disregard of the Constitution has not produced chaos or totalitarianism; on the contrary, it has helped us to grow and prosper.

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by whatsecret

---

From your own source, and I must say that I quit reading at this point........

Our sometimes flagrant disregard of the Constitution has not produced chaos or totalitarianism; on the contrary, it has helped us to grow and prosper.

Those of us who realize that our Constitution has been flagrantly violated by our elected officials, might tend to be as offended as I am by this ridiculous concept......

Not seeing any growth or prosper for the working poor in this country. If I am wrong OP, please enlighten me...

I am not a constitutional expert or anything even close to it, but here's what I think..

The Constitution may be and should be amended if any part of it allows violations of the right to Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness of any human being. But We the People should decide what needs to be adjusted. Unfortunately our leaders violated the Constitution not change it. And what we get as a result is Wars and things like the Patriot Act. So to me it appears as if the flagrant violations DID produced chaos or totalitarianism.

I would really suggest that you read our Constitution and the Bill of Rights a few times before you allow some rag like the one in your post, try to tell you our Constitution is not working and needs to be changed....

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by whatsecret
We should try capitalism first.

Where have you been? Capitalism replaced feudalism 250 years ago.

History of the term capitalism

The esteemed French historian Fernand Braudel traces the history of the use and development of the term capitalism in volume II of his three volume history of capitalism, Civilization and Capitalism. According to Braudel, the first identified use of the term capitalist was in 1633. By the late 1700s it had come into use as a name for private handlers of money for private financial gain.

In 1850, Louis Blanc defined capitalism as "the appropriation of capital by some to the exclusion of others." Proudhon later defined it as an "Economic and social regime in which capital, the source of income, does not generally belong to those who make it work through their labour."

Adam Smith published his seminal thesis The Wealth of Nations in 1776. Clearly the term capitalism was unknown to him. Furthermore, since Smith had a strong aversion to financial speculation and any concentration of monopoly power he would have been a strong critic of capitalism.

resurgence.opendemocracy.net...

Befor­e the Industrial Revolution in the 1800s, countries like Britain and the United States had true capitalist economies. With industrialization, though, came sweat shops, social protest and resulting government intervention in the form of fair labor laws. That's when real capitalism ended.

If you want to learn about the Constitution from someone who has been teaching it for years, watch Michael Badnarik's videos on youtube. He was the Libertarian Party nominee for POTUS in 2004.

Originally posted by ANOK
reply to post by whatsecret

---

Capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production. A term coined by socialists.

There are no rules other than those imposed on it by governments. To say what capitalism is, other than it's a private property economy, is nonsense.

Before the industrial revolution? Capitalism started right before the industrial revolution, and was the reason it happened. It did not change capitalism, it still remains the private ownership of the means of production, the predominant economy the world over.

In a capitalist economy money rules, not governments. Real power comes from wealth not votes.

Capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production.