Where Does The Hatred Of Constitutionalism Come From?

I came across this article over at ZeroHedge.com which was originally posted at Alt-Market Blog. I found it to be insightful and informative. There are a lot of "sore" sensitive points hit upon here that are definitely not only worthy of discussion, but paramount IMO.

Maybe I wasn't paying as much attention before, but I don't remember, in all my days, the Constitution being under so much attack - and from the "inside" no less.

The author presents an interesting perspective and makes several nonpartisan assertions. I'll highlight some here, but recommend reading it in its entirety.

It’s been a long time coming, but in the new millennium, there is now indeed a subsection of the masses that not only have no relationship to our founding roots, they actually despise those of us who do!

There are a number of reasons for this dangerous development in our culture: A public school system that rarely if ever teaches children about the revolution, the founders, constitutional liberty, or the virtues of individualism in general. A mainstream media apparatus that has regurgitated endless anti-constitutional shlock for decades, attacking any person or group that presents a freedom oriented view. And a governmental structure that has become so corrupt, so openly criminal, that they ignore all aspects of constitutional law without regard, rarely feeling the need to explain themselves.

In my view, the American public is being conditioned to see us as a convenient “enemy” which they can use to project all their internal grief and woe. Our country is on the verge of collapse, economically, politically, and philosophically. Corporatized elements of our government and the financial high priests of the international banking sector are behind this calamity, and of course, they don’t plan to take responsibility.

There is no doubt in my mind that a great conflict is near, between those of us who value liberty and constitutional protections, and those who would destroy them.

Here are some of the author's conclusions:

The Anti-Constitutionalist Suffers From An Inferiority Complex

These are the average useful idiots who know little of history, politics, economics, etc., but feel the desperate need to appear as though they are experts on everything. This usually results in constant attempts to show off for anyone who will pay attention, usually with sound-bites they heard on the nightly news coupled with remedial attacks against the character of those who dare to step outside the mainstream.

The Anti-Constitutionalist Does Not Like The Idea Of A Law He Cannot Use To His Advantage

Not all anti-constitutionalists are dense. A limited few are very intelligent, but morally bankrupt.

The Anti-Constitutionalist Hates Those Who Go Against The Tide, Even If The Tide Is Drowning Us All

Constitutionalists are predominantly individualists. We do not cater to collectivist fairy tales. We do not seek to roll with the tide just for the sake of finding our “place” within the machine. We do not care about “fitting in” with the mainstream.

Constitutionalists Are Not Politically Correct

Their ultimate and ideal revenge would be to see us painted as social malcontents; like people who smoke in public, or wear a mullet…

The Anti-Constitutionalist Thinks He Knows What’s Best For All Of Us

Most people who seek to deny and destroy constitutional liberties tend to lean towards a collectivist philosophy. They are usually socialist, or a variation (Marxist, Fascist), and can be professed members of either major political party.

This writer rams forward, point after point, not recklessly and without any concern of being attacked by the very group he derails. I dig that.

I would be interested in reading some of the responses from this community.

Thanks for reading.

Oh, and be sure to check out some of the responses at ZeroHedge - they are always interesting.

reply to post by capod2t

Where Does The Hatred Of Constitutionalism Come From?

Ignorance, among the common man.

And sociopathy among those who hate the idea of freedom for anyone but themselves. They see all other humans as objects to be manipulated and used for their benefit and gain.

I believe they (those that want to radically change or remove the Constitution) are the types of people that got trophies for being on the losing baseball team. Just kidding...

Our population has been systematically "educated" over the past few decades that we are a democracy...which is a lie. We are a Constitutional Republic based on the rule of law. Said law and civil rights are to be equally applied to the many, the few...and the one. Those that want majority rule (aka Mob Rule) do not like the fact that a single individual has the right to stop something that the many may want. So how do they get their way? By undermining the documents that give the few and the one equal representation.

There is another train of thought as well. There are many people that want to give over their freedom in order to be "taken care of". It's called the Nanny/Police state and it is stunning how many people are just fine with it. They apparently do not like Liberty and freedom (see my signature for the Shaw quote) and do not want anyone else to have it either.

I think it was Reagan that said...to paraphrase...The scariest thing a person can hear is ..."I'm from the Government and I am here to help you."

The Gov does nothing for the good of Freedom and Liberty. Anyone who thinks they do are smoking something. Leaders these days do not actually want to "lead"...they want to "rule"...and there is a huge difference. yet....there is a growing group of people that seem to be so dumbed down and distracted...they themselves do not see the difference and probably won't until they are on the wrong side of the earlier mentioned "mob rules"...

Edit to add:

There are those crying for pure democracy and will tell you they believe in equality...which is a paradox in a sense. Those that cry for a pure democracy feel that the majority should be able to dictate terms to the minority...this is not equality...when 51% think they can rule over 49%...you have the makings of an explosive scenario.

I always think of this quote when the conversation comes up about Constitutional Republic versus a pure democracy...

"Republics decline into democracies and democracies degenerate into despotism."...Aristotle

We MUST be a Constitutional Republic. Historically, Republics have lasted for centuries...no Democracy has ever had a long life...they falter and fail...always.

reply to post by capod2t

Where Does The Hatred Of Constitutionalism Come From?

From abusing it and pushing it to the limit.

First, "Control Freaks" (which most in government - elected or not - are) do not like to be Controlled and the Constitution represents restrictions (control) on government by the people.

Second, The elite in government (often wealthier and more educated than the masses) feel a sense of superiority over their constituents (the people) and they rationalize a noblesse oblige service while reaping beaucoup benefits of said service.

Third, The Constitution (especially The Bill of Rights or the 1st Ten Amendments) confers and confirms individual rights (little people) at the expense of the government (collective)...and as the state grows its locus of power shifts more from the people per se to its own dynamic.

reply to post by capod2t


It is happening right before our eyes and yet people refuse to believe what they see.

" You Americans are so gullible! We don't have to invade you! We will destroy you from within without firing a shot! We will bury you by the billions! We spoon feed you socialism until your Communists and don't even know it! We assist your elected leaders in giving you small doses of Socialism until you suddenly awake to find you have Communism. the day will come when your grandchildren will live under communism!" - Nikita Khrushchev

And then of course, we also have those who advocate this.

I don't hate the constitution. I hate that people hide behind it to force their way of life and their beliefs on others. Good and well meaning ideas and people are shoved aside for 'freedom' and 'liberty.' Concepts that are only rationalized in an individuals mind and have no meaning to anyone else other than the individual.

We can't have universal health care because 'freedom.'
We can't have rational gun laws because 'freedom.'
We can't provide for the poor and destitute because 'freedom.'
We can't educate the populace because 'freedom.'
We can't accept ideas and opinions other than what we've always thought to be true because 'freedom.'
We can't stop the CEO's and property owners from stealing every last penny from us all because 'freedom.'
We can't let other individuals and other nations pave their own way because 'freedom.'

I have come to accept that there are people in this country that I will never, ever agree with. They will vote for people that I adamently disagree with and I will always, always, always applaud their wish to do so. Even if it will sometimes inhibit my own concept of 'freedom.'

Then again there are people that simply refuse to acknowledge that the most important lesson we could have learned from the founding fathers was that the people should be allowed to forge their own 'freedom,' even if it means leaving the old 'freedom' behind.

I believe that the majority of anti-constitutionalists do not want to take any responsibility for their actions. They want the government to tell them what to do and give them "stuff".
They are afraid to stand on their own two feet.
They don't know how to think for themselves.

reply to post by links234

We can't have universal health care because 'freedom.
' We can't have rational gun laws because 'freedom.'
We can't provide for the poor and destitute because 'freedom.
' We can't educate the populace because 'freedom.
' We can't accept ideas and opinions other than what we've always thought to be true because 'freedom.
' We can't stop the CEO's and property owners from stealing every last penny from us all because 'freedom.
' We can't let other individuals and other nations pave their own way because 'freedom.'

That quote is the problem that the OP was talking about. And I just Loooove the language that is used. "universal health care" Call it what it is THEFT. Forcing a group of people to pay for services for another group of people. REAL freedom is choosing which DR. to go to and when and for whatever reason and paying for it yourself is freedom.

Anyone that wants a government to take care of them is not "rational" and as such I can assume I would not want them deciding which firearm I own.

No where in the Constitution does it provide for or against charity. So leave that to the private individual or group to help the poor.

How about less Gov mandates about education and MORE freedom for schools.

Not sure what he's talking about here but can't wait to hear it.

Not sure which "property owner" is stealing from anyone, or CEO for that matter that wasn't enabled by said government that this poster wants more of.

Again less government and a return to the Constitution would solve more problems that what we have now.

reply to post by capod2t

Where Does The Hatred Of Constitutionalism Come From?

Two places, ignorance or idiocy.

Because nothing else makes sense.

Most of this hatred is coming from non-Americans. Non-Americans who lost their freedoms due to being spineless and foolish. So they are just so bitterly angry and jealous that they cannot help but mind American business to vent their rage.

Sad.

I think that the article misses something vital.
The anti-Constitution crowd have gotten marching orders from somewhere,this is not an
organic idea that just happened to pop up in someones head.

A government needs a contract between itself and the people who are governed.
Anti-Constitutionalists (my word) are not saying to abolish the contract.
Just THIS one.
Then to modify it to make it more inline with what their masters want.
The original Constitution was a Royal pain.
If we undo our current one,and get a new one, who is to say what that one will be like?
I fear for our nation.
The planners are patient,very smart,and Very well funded.
And we may be set up for a truly Royal screw up.
Perhaps a Commonwealth approach to ownership,property rights etc will be in the works.
After all,its worked so well for such a large part of the world.

Originally posted by links234
I don't hate the constitution. I hate that people hide behind it to force their way of life and their beliefs on others. Good and well meaning ideas and people are shoved aside for 'freedom' and 'liberty.' Concepts that are only rationalized in an individuals mind and have no meaning to anyone else other than the individual.

We can't have universal health care because 'freedom.'
We can't have rational gun laws because 'freedom.'
We can't provide for the poor and destitute because 'freedom.'
We can't educate the populace because 'freedom.'
We can't accept ideas and opinions other than what we've always thought to be true because 'freedom.'
We can't stop the CEO's and property owners from stealing every last penny from us all because 'freedom.'
We can't let other individuals and other nations pave their own way because 'freedom.'

I have come to accept that there are people in this country that I will never, ever agree with. They will vote for people that I adamently disagree with and I will always, always, always applaud their wish to do so. Even if it will sometimes inhibit my own concept of 'freedom.'

Then again there are people that simply refuse to acknowledge that the most important lesson we could have learned from the founding fathers was that the people should be allowed to forge their own 'freedom,' even if it means leaving the old 'freedom' behind.

Can't deport you because you have the freedom to make your morally questionable points because because you're protected by the 1st amendment.

BTW your closing comment negated all points previously made in your post.

can you give some examples of the hatred of constitutionalism from a person that matters ?

ps

obama hasn't taken your guns yet

lol

reply to post by Carreau


You see? We can't call it what it is because 'freedom.' If a large percentage, let's say a majority, agree to all chip in to this publicy driven organization called government to ensure that we all have an equal amount of access to health care without fear of losing our way of life through insurmountable debt it's suddenly 'theft.' When asked why the new term is applied we get a screwy idea of what this individuals concept of 'freedom' is. We can't even discuss the reasons behind the problems we have because 'freedom.'

Further down we get more to the idea of what the OP was bringing up, hatred of the constitution. Non-existent hatred I might add.

No where in the Constitution does it provide for or against...

Which is why we should discuss amending it or interpreting it a little more vaguely so that we can 'provide for the common good.' We could even discuss scrapping the whole thing and starting over because we live in a toally different world than when it was written...but that's probably the last option I would advocate.

Originally posted by 11235813213455
BTW your closing comment negated all points previously made in your post.

Just because I think the constitution was a good idea at the time and the philosophers that had an effect on it were ingenious for their time doesn't mean I don't respect the concepts and ideas born from that era. They could use a little updating though. It's like saying I don't respect the idea of a republic because the greeks thought of it thousands of years ago.

reply to post by links234


Nope.. I think it's just fine where it's at. We don't need any tinkering by mental degenerate central planners..

The beauty of this document is that it is a document of enumerated powers to the government which makes it a document of positive rights to the people defacto. The problem with your line of thinking is that you want to make it a document of positive rights to the government or what the government must do on your behalf.. Very very dangerous and wrongheaded.

reply to post by Carreau

That quote is the problem that the OP was talking about.

Thank you! Everyday, every executive order, regardless of the party "in power" moves us further and further into being controlled, manipulated and enslaved. It took a revolution for the Constitution to be enacted. And it may take a revolution to reenact it.

Originally posted by 11235813213455
Nope.. I think it's just fine where it's at. We don't need any tinkering by mental degenerate central planners..

This is another point that I was hinting on. Those that suggest amending or changing the consitution because they believe there are problems that need to be addressed and can only effectively be addressed by the federal government are called 'haters' of the consitution.

I can't even have a reasonable conversation with 11235813213455 (how do you even remember that?) because I see a problem and he/she does not. This is the heart of the conversation about where 'hatred' of the constitution comes from, that some see problems with society that can be rectified and those that refuse to see those issues as problems.

Originally posted by links234

Originally posted by 11235813213455
Nope.. I think it's just fine where it's at. We don't need any tinkering by mental degenerate central planners..

This is another point that I was hinting on. Those that suggest amending or changing the consitution because they believe there are problems that need to be addressed and can only effectively be addressed by the federal government are called 'haters' of the consitution.

I can't even have a reasonable conversation with 11235813213455 (how do you even remember that?) because I see a problem and he/she does not. This is the heart of the conversation about where 'hatred' of the constitution comes from, that some see problems with society that can be rectified and those that refuse to see those issues as problems.

What we have here is a conflict of visions.

Mine is one of self sufficiency where I believe in the freedom for one to seek and develop solutions to ones problems or others if they feel so charitable.. As long as it does not pick another's pocket or break ones leg.... which is in alignment with the original intent of the constitution. In short, I don't look toward the government to take care of me like a mother or father would.

Yours is a dichotomized version of my brief explanation above. That said we will be forever at odds because we look at the subject 180 degrees opposite from each other.

Moreover, I don't think it is a hatred of it as much as it is a misunderstanding of how the thing works

reply to post by 11235813213455

Originally posted by links234
I have come to accept that there are people in this country that I will never, ever agree with. They will vote for people that I adamently disagree with and I will always, always, always applaud their wish to do so. Even if it will sometimes inhibit my own concept of 'freedom.'

I said that earlier. I'm glad we can agree that we will disagree.

Let me ask you this though, if a collective of individuals agree to do something seemingly oppositional to what the constitution says as an agreement that it would be better for all of those individuals...don't you think that they have the right to do that? The founder's sure did which is how we make our laws and how our interpretation of the consitution changes to suit modern society's need without amending the consitution to irrelevancy.