Beware of Constitutional Conventions and new Constitutions that have ANY “exceptions”
The U.S. Constitution was a unique consummation of the centuries-long tradition of increasing levels of recognition for basic human rights and freedoms that went back and forth through history, mostly in the British isles, both in written documents and in common law.
The Magna Carta is a good example of this. It was not perfect but it was better than most other arrangements in Europe, and it formalized a set of principles that expanded the idea of the governed having a say in the government that rules them. The expansion was only so far, though, as touching the fellow nobility.
The U. S. Constitution was a further expansion of those ideas, but much more. There were a lot of brilliant minds who were extremely well versed in the writings of other brilliant minds, and they could well have said better than Isaac Newton, that their work “stood on the shoulders of giants” that came before them.
In one study, 15,000 quotes of the founders (the founders quoting other sources) as found in newspapers, articles, letters, and other writings were studied. 34% of the quotes were from the Bible, the most quoted source, and second was John Locke, then Montesquieu, Blackstone, who are known today as a political and legal philosopher.
To try to do something like that today you’d get Harvard law grads and Yalies who have no clue, who think the commerce clause means a government can rob its own citizens to give the loot to a private developer, tell its people what they have to buy and what they can make for sale, and that habeas corpus and court-issued warrants are optional
Like you have now a clueless dictator-friendly Ginzburg saying that the South Africa constitution is superior?
Just looking at the Preamble of it is scary with ‘its stated intention of establishing “a society based on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights”‘.
Don’t take my word for it, let them tell you:
In the first chapter, human rights appear in the first of the Founding Provisions of the Republic of South Africa: “Human dignity, the achievement of equality and the advancement of human rights and freedoms.” Spelt out in detail, they occupy 35 sections of chapter 2.
Among the rights stipulated are those of equality, freedom of expression and association, political and property rights, housing, healthcare, education, access to information, and access to courts.
But “somebody” has to enforce all that and decide what is “fair”. That means government owns all your property and lets you keep whatever it decides is “fair”.
The devil is in the details, and in the end, it depends on who are the deciders in government, meaning, if the “representatives” are corrupt then it doesn’t matter what’s written down.
But at least when it’s written down “in black and white”, you can make mincemeat of the stupid legalese they use in decisions like Roe v Wade and Kelo v. City of New London. And NDAA. And the Patriot Act.
Karl Marx said once if you can separate a people from its history you can make them believe anything. The Internet has helped a lot of us recuperate some of that lost history, and so we’re a lot more skeptic.
That’s why they’ll keep on attacking the Internet.
- What makes the U.S. Constitution so good? (trutherator.wordpress.com)