Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
![]()
Not then it didn't.
"We the people" is an admirable expression and as a European I have great admiration for men like Thomas Jefferson.
Though of course I prefer Article 6 of the Declaration of Rights of Man and of the Citizen.
"La Loi est l'expression de la volonté générale. Tous les Citoyens ont droit de concourir personnellement, ou par leurs Représentants, à sa formation. Elle doit être la même pour tous, soit qu'elle protège, soit qu'elle punisse. Tous les Citoyens étant égaux à ses yeux sont également admissibles à toutes dignités, places et emplois publics, selon leur capacité, et sans autre distinction que celle de leurs vertus et de leurs talents."
For me this is the song of human universality.
"It is true that we are called a democracy, for the administration is in the hands of the many and not of the few."Not that hard to do a swift google.
@Zendervai: In fact, colonial America operated relatively independently for the longest time prior to the actual American Revolution. The reason why the American Revolution happened was ultimately because Britain was trying to gain more control over colonial America. The state constitutions of colonial America survived relatively intact in the transition to the United States, and after the failure of the Articles of Confederation, the U.S. Constitution was written by following the example of state constitutions at the time.
Basically, colonial America was already a functional independent power (or well, 13 functional independent powers) that only really lost its token loyalty with the British Crown when it became the United States which is why the American Revolution was successful. It was pretty much the governments of colonial America fighting against the British government.
edited 3rd Jul '16 12:43:21 PM by GameGuruGG
Wizard Needs Food BadlyFair enough. I'm sorry if I offended you. In my real life environment I'm used to people speaking different languages. I should've posted a translation. Thankfully Majoraoftime has done that for me, my thanks.
"It is true that we are called a democracy, for the administration is in the hands of the many and not of the few."@Game Guru: The big step the Constitution took was federalization. The states were functional powers but it wasn't a given that they could remain a nation and the Federalist/Anti-Federalist debate was a long and heated one, the compromises over which shaped a lot of the details, such as the two-house legislature.
That is true. The U.S. Constitution formed a federal government where there was not one before... However, the mere fact that the 13 states, who were adamantly against any sort of higher government telling them what to do, decided ultimately that they needed a higher government if they were to ultimately remain United States says everything that needs to be said.
About the increase in egalitarianism the Revolution apparently fostered: not if female, poor, a racial minority or of a French background it wasn't. Repeated studies of the time period show a marked reduction in social and legal rights and status for most groups within the States.
The group that directly benefited? Landed white men — but, especially those with a lot of land and slaves or indentured servants. <_<
And, why was this? They were the ones allowed to vote. Their voice was heard — nobody else's. The constitutional remains of what had been "the common weal" in the laws and legislative frameworks of England, Wales and Scotland which protected (minimally) the rights of the disenfranchised "commons"... were chucked out. This was the case for most of your history as an independent nation.
To all intents and purposes, most people actually lost rights upon leaving Britain. Even though, in theory they increased (practice is what you need to look at) and they were told they were freer. The words "all", "men", "citizen" and "people" had caveats attached. Lots and lots of caveats.
Brexit... -_-
edited 3rd Jul '16 3:43:00 PM by Euodiachloris
Wouldn't moving from a monarchy to a democratic republic with an official protection of individual rights for anyone in and of itself be a major step forwards?
And it is correct that rhetoric of the American Revolution was, itself, very important. While the "all men are created equal and endowed by their creator certain unalienable rights" didn't mean that much in practice, the underlying theory itself remains to this day influential. Many future movements towards a more meritocratic and egalitarian society are based on this idea.
edited 3rd Jul '16 4:07:11 PM by Protagonist506
Leviticus 19:34![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
What studies?
Edit: And is this immediately after the Revolution or in the subsequent decades. Because immediately after the war Slavery was abolished in the North. And in the South, where it had previously been illegal, the freeing of slaves was legalized. In addition it was made easier by several acts of legislation. However what few gains were made in the South were reversed by the panic that followed the Haitian Revolution and the Nat Turner Rebellion. In addition Slavery was able to cling around until the invention of the cotton gin,at which point it became profitable again. And many families were broken up as slaves were moved west, in what some term as a second middle passage.
I have no idea about the status of women. We had no Hispanics until the annexation of Florida. The only group you'd be right about would be the Native Americans.
Also you forget that in the US a much higher percentage of the population owned land than in Europe, thus making votes by that group more representative of the popular will, than they might have been in say England, especially since outside the South their was little to no tradition of "landed gentry." Your talk about noble is absurd, we had none and one of the reasons for rebellion was that the British were contemplating creating a peerage system for the colonies.
edited 3rd Jul '16 4:31:00 PM by JackOLantern1337
I Bring Doom,and a bit of gloom, but mostly gloom.
Many, many historical, socio-economic and constitutional studies. Whole books, papers. screeds. Bookshelves, mate.
And, not all Marxist-feminist claptrap from the 70s. Although, fair warning: there be dragons on the shelves. ;P
Also: I wasn't kidding about the concept of "the common weal" — Just ask various Plantagenets how well things went when they trampled over the existing rights of the commons, not just the Barons. (Spoiler Alert: not well.)
Monarchies aren't always nice, but representation isn't the only way rights can be defended... Or, even lost. <_<
Representation is great; but it's not inherently better. All forms of government function only as well as the systems put in place, and grand ideas can fall splat because of the checks and balances being inadequate. Doesn't matter if we're talking direct democracy, representative democracy, constitutional monarchy, absolute monarch or a dictatorial oligarchy.
edited 3rd Jul '16 4:42:06 PM by Euodiachloris
Not really, the UK was and still is a monarchy but you're making the mistake of assuming that a Republic is somehow inherently more democratic then a monarchy. The UK may well have been more democratic, remember pretty much all power in the UK even then rested in the hands of 'elected' officials, British monarches stopped being able to dictate to Parliment in 1688 (maybe earlier), when Parliemnt replaced the monarch with one they liked better.
edited 3rd Jul '16 5:03:14 PM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
x5
Something to consider is that Democracies and Representative Republics do have the advantage where, because no one has absolute power, there is a limit to how much damage the flaws of any one individual can do. This doesn't make them perfect of course, but it means that it's much harder for them to achieve a worst-case-scenario, since the society as a whole needs to be on board with doing something horrible.
So for instance while, I firmly believe that Donald Trump would be a truly disastrous President, if he is somehow elected Congress can impeach him if he goes too far. And since the military is sworn to protect the Constitution above their duty to follow the orders of the President in his role as Commander and Chief, Trump would have no ability to stop them from carrying out an impeachment.
edited 3rd Jul '16 5:04:09 PM by Falrinn
