Kelly Gerling Profile picture
Sep 4, 2019 7 tweets 3 min read Read on X
@WilliamHogeland 1/ The part that still is able “to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority” are the institutions/processes created in Articles 1-6. The Senate, Presidency/Executive, The Supreme Court, the States, are there to get abolishment and ratification (06-21-1788) & to...
@WilliamHogeland 2/ ...block the popular will as it might be expressed by the House of the People as a whole, directly. The amendments you refer to expand those incorporated into the set of individuals with individual rights, but don’t alter the divide-and-rule, confuse-and-rule design features.
@WilliamHogeland 3/ Nor do they, nor other amendments of the post-1791 15, nor the subsequent SCOTUS rulings, recover & amplify the block, stop and remove functions of direct democracy in the Preamble, the Declaration, and the VA Declaration of Rights that affirm the entire democratic tradition.
@WilliamHogeland 4/ So to achieve what New Zealand has achieved with their constitutional design, and many other nations, to closely match the popular will with implemented public policy, the American citizenry needs to recreate the agreement between ourselves by which we self-govern ourselves.
@WilliamHogeland 5/ We can do that directly via a third Constitution. Our states have had 233 state constitutional assemblies leading to over 150 new constitutions and over 6000 new amendments, according to John Dinan’s “The American State Constitutional Tradition.” We are long past due for that.
@WilliamHogeland 6/ Amar’s conclusion, consistent with what Sanford Levinson, Richard Albert @dhlazare advocate, is via a Democratic People’s Constitutional Assembly or DPCA, or what Lazare calls a constituent assembly, along these lines: jacobinmag.com/2017/01/consti…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Kelly Gerling

Kelly Gerling Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @kellygerling

Sep 26, 2020
@WilliamHogeland Thanks. That event, by majority-rule voting of 724 out of 1086, abolished the 1st Constitution while establishing the 2nd. It invokes the issue of sovereignty. Under the 1st Constitution, each of the 13 states was "sovereign" — possessing the "supreme authority of nation." 1/
@WilliamHogeland 2/ Thus the first "constitution of the Federal Government" was "federal" as Congress then stated, and now, according to the current definition. "Sovereignty" being a type of authority assigned to nations only, is supreme, presupposing "final" and "indivisible." So sovereignty...
@WilliamHogeland 3/ ...grew in scope to include the nation as a whole, as established by the 1787 national "Constitution of the United States of America." Who or what was then "The Sovereign"? James Wilson who authored the "We the People ... ordain and establish..." part of the Preamble said...
Read 8 tweets
Sep 19, 2020
@RichardAlbert Thanks Richard. There are some key features that could be examined: de facto two-party v. multiparty; bicameral v. unicameral; presidential v. parliamentary; direct democracy versus no direct democracy (with many variations); much private & corporate money v. little or none... 1/
@RichardAlbert 2/ ...in elections; etc. The above-mentioned features are summarized, in each case, by the contrast between New Zealand's constitutional design and America's constitutional design. If there are studies that correlate such features with the extent to which the popular will...
@RichardAlbert 3/ ...is implemented or blocked, I'd like to know. In the American case, the primary author of the American design structure in Articles 1-4 — Madison — was very clear in his own Notes and those of Robert Yates on 06-26-1787. He said the purpose of the structure was: Image
Read 5 tweets
Jan 3, 2020
@BretWeinstein Yes. Leadership in a constitutional crisis, and resulting incoherence, must come from people whose thinking is not locked in mental cages installed by centuries of propaganda. They have discovered the causes of the crisis, thus its solutions. My favorite candidates are these: 1/
@BretWeinstein 2/ First, in a constitutional crisis, the causes must be analyzed outside of the restrictive Overton Window that has obscured them —mostly deliberately — of, by & for the ruling oligarchy. In the case of the 1787 American Constitution, the causes are revealed by these scholars.
@BretWeinstein 3/ I start with the historian Michael Klarman in his revealing account of the underlying oligarchic intent and founding deceptions by the oligarchs among the authors: “The Framers' Coup: The Making of the United States Constitution” amazon.com/dp/0190865962/
Read 8 tweets
Oct 13, 2019
@MonicaHesse Saw this: washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/styl… It appears to be true that about one out of a hundred men are psychopaths, but only one out of 1500 women. Most geniuses appear to be men. That’s two extremes, perhaps it’s based on genetics. If so... 1/
2/ ...then what can be done to protect society from the many men and the fewer women who are psychopaths? Options: 1. Universal mental health insurance? 2. Screening for special treatment? 3.) Banning the assault and torture of children in schools (called “corporal punishment”)?
3/ 4. Banning assault and torture of children in homes? 5. Prohibiting the ownership of semiautomatic rifles like New Zealand did? 6. Making training, recurrent training and home safety inspections for any gun owner? 7. Strengthening backgroundchecks for all gun sales?
Read 5 tweets
Sep 5, 2019
@WilliamHogeland @dhlazare Persuading the public to exercise the collective right to be the Sovereign, and to do as Jefferson described in his Declaration draft to “alter” or “abolish” our government and to “institute new government” when that government fails, requires a look at the past. 1/
@WilliamHogeland @dhlazare 2/ That’s because what is legal is based on the past via the stare decisis — precedent. AND Americans are a largely indoctrinated people who look to an imagined past for guidance. The actual past then is relevant for what to do in the present to democratize the nation.
@WilliamHogeland @dhlazare 3/ Normally, in *modern* democratic nations, changing the constitutional design falls to political parties. Under a constitutional design, such as ours, that effectively deprived us of party choice, that is not a practical option. So it’s missing is creating the organizational...
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(