Socialism Doesn't work with the Constitution

That's the theory. Yet, every socialist government seems to put a damper on free speech, press and practice of religion the moment they take power. You haven't noticed that trend?

 

Socialism tends to pair itself with authoritarianism. But it doesn't have to. Socialism has nothing to do with social freedom.

 

And you believe the United States will not? The inherent weakness of a libertarian system is that it cannot persist--the people inevitably demand a larger government.

 

.... and this proves that the absence of pirates causes global warming.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_pVCiTA86umk/SxAlAufv0DI/AAAAAAAACMU/_rkW_P5tpJI/s1600/global-warming.jpg

Correlation =/= causation

Socialism is an economic system, it has absolutely nothing to do with speech.

 

Lack of free speech has also been associated with far right wing governments. You're right. Speech has nothing to do with socialism.

 

It is clear by this statement that you do not understand the Declaration of Independance or the Constitution. It speaks of inalienable rights. As in you are endowed by your creator (nature if you prefer) with these rights. Rights that are not granted by the govt, cannot be taken away. And that is the whole point of the Const. The const. is not a document listing what YOU can or cannot do.... it lists what the govt can and cannot do.

 

The declaration of independence is not a legal document. Nor does the constitution mention anything about inalienable rights. Nothing in the constitution is sacred from an amendment. If 2/3rds of the states ratified an amendment to make only golden retrievers eligible for president and only monkeys could vote for the canine candidates that's exactly the kind of governmental system we'd have.

 

It certainly does. It certainly doesn't have to, but it always will. It is an imperative peripheral protocol. Rational choice theory.

 

Thanks for proving yourself impervious to reason or debate. Have a great ridiculous life.

 

He did no such thing. The banking system is more heavily "regulated" than ever and it's still failing. Regulations and government force can only prop up a corrupt and broken system for so long. Eventually the free market will rear its head and give everyone a reality check. True deregulation would be a blessing.

 

Why amend the Constitution when you can just ignore it? That's what you support anyway

 

I agree that it is unlikely we will see a socialist government that is not authoritarian anytime soon.

 

Where in the Constitution does it say that Congress has the right to "regulate the markets how it sees fit"?

 

Simply disproving your claim that correlation equals causation.

 

There is no part of the constitution that I ignore.

 

Do you support the Federal Reserve System?

 

Sometime people who interpret the constitution have no cognitive capacity to understand the complex document. They turn a complex issue into a simple two dimentional if/or interpretation. The Constitution is by far harder to decypher than the simple rantings of a bible level preacher. When discussing the constitution, one must take into account the purpose, the era, the amendments, and the history of each attempted ammendments, and know why the constitution has been changed or altered for it's period, and why wat that change needed.

Bottom line is discussing the constitutional effectiveness of the document is only acheived if all parties have the capacity to understand and communicate in intelligent dialogue. Simple explainations and content are just a waste of time.

 

The failings of a governmental system are usually chalked up to one thing greedy humans. As soon as someone figures out how to overcome those you have a infallible system.

 

Read post #15.

Most rational people distrust and dislike government, the only ones demanding a larger government are the ignorant.

 

As soon as someone figures out how to overcome that you also have no need for Government at all.

Why didn't that occur to you?

 

On the contrary, the Preamble states explicitly that one of the goals of the Constitution is to secure the Blessings of Liberty, which won't exist if America becomes one giant company town.

No, it is given the authority to regulate certain types of commerce. It may not use that authority to mold industries according to its desire.

Of course people who don't value liberty can be expected to interpret it as you do.

There is no such thing as an economic system which has absolutely nothing to do with free speech, obviously.

Not explicitly, but they are clearly implied in 9A.

Suffrage of the states in the senate is, unless the amendment passes unanimously.

It takes 3/4 to ratify an amendment.

 

My mistake

 

Friend, provide some objective proof for your conspiracy theories before you cite them. You seem to believe anything conspiracy theorists will tell you. Further, you just ignore the parts of my post that force you to objectively analyze your assumptions about the world. I don't mean to insult you friend.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_6-iVz1R0o"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_6-iVz1R0o[/ame]

 

Nah, in addition to the greedy, there are the grossly incompetent government needs to hold in check, both foreign and domestic.

 

And you don't understand the difference between capitalism and corporatism.

Actually you are upset of corporatism, which is even weight capitalism turned evil.

Corruption can destroy fair scales.