All human problems stem from politics. Cancer only affects some individuals. A critical meteor would affect all life on Earth. Thus, all big problems that affect all humans are always politically generated.
Most political ideologies are good in theory, but always overlook various aspects and criteria, intentionally or not. The biggest issues they ALL ignore are corruption and secrecy. I would sign up to be a Communist, Democrat, Green, Libertarian, or Republican (or their Canadian equivalent parties) in a heartbeat if any of them could pragmatically and practically deliver on the promise to remove the corruption and secrecy that serves only the entrenched power structures that not only deceive, manipulate, steal, exploit, and murder their own citizens - but all the people of the world.
In short, my dream Amendment would be...
All governments (including their actions, actors/agents/representatives, accountings, communications, documents, organizations, and more) must be fully transparent and accountable to remove corruption and secrecy.
I dream big.
Freedom of speech is already supposed to be a thing. I'd say currency and economic freedom should be a thing too, but that quickly gets complicated - as does the monopoly on violence.
A few years ago I was talking to Sam Tripoli about animating an introduction to his show. It didn't happen. But I could call him back, get him to talk to Jimmy Dore, get Jimmy Dore to talk to Joe Rogan, and get Joe Rogan to talk to Donald Trump, and get Donald Trump to talk to the Zionists running the show - and maybe they might consider our amendment. Maybe.
Well this question was part of a larger idea. I was going to ask on right leaning forums, and left leaning forums, and libertarian leaning forums what their top restrictive amendment would be.
The idea is if you took the top request from the right and the top request from the left and married them together you might get an amendment both would support.
I just want to see a restrictive amendment pass again.
The top voted constructive one on the right I got was a requirement that the federal government have nothing to do with private citizens. You only interact with your state. With the exception of if you own a company and it's actually engaged in interstate commerce.
The top voted actually constructive on the left was war is exclusively defensive. No such thing as vague "national interests." We have to be attacked domestically before any war power can be exercised.
Some of them on each forum were so vague I'm going to count them as failing to answer the question. Sentiments more than anything. "No one including the government should be able to profit off of suffering." Ok. If I sell you a sandwich because you were suffering mild hunger did I profit off of suffering? What if it was extreme hunger? Would I not be allowed to sell you a sandwich. That hunger's going to get worse fast. I didn't cause the suffering. Maybe they mean if I do cause the suffering. They said this would apply to government as well. What does it mean for government to profit? Collect taxes? If they obtain money only because of the suffering they would impose on me if I didn't "voluntarily" pay my taxes then is that profit from being someone who causes suffering? How else does government profit? Since they said that is an issue for government they clearly intend to eliminate at least one revenue source for the government. What is there in the government's revenue besides taxes that is suffering based?
A better way to phrase "ban classified information" would be to expose or free all information.
And just as critically, make "authority" responsible by holding all wrong doers accountable - just as we're held accountable for crimes and offenses, malicious or not, intentional or not.
Like many things that get out of hand with government they sometime have a root in a seemingly valid issue. Obviously in a time of actual war the government could not be sharing their plans and their own intel about their own units (where are they) in real time on some searchable public database. Classification started for that kind of information. It just grew beyond an acceptable level. But they use the argument of that case to hide all other uses behind.
What if all classified information has to sunset and be public within a year? If it's so critical that an enemy would want the info the enemy probably figured out how to know it within a year on their own. So the US government knows it, and the enemy knows it, we might as well know it.
I defy anyone to find me a "legitimate" war that was based on anything but lies.
There are no real excuses for secrecy, secret agencies, shadow governments, or an unelected non-representative deep state. Or documents classified for 75 years beyond the lifespan of criminal abusers.
I like that sunset idea. It could be a fair interim step between both extremes to soften the transition.
There's no good reason why they should know all about us and us nothing about them. Only evil reasons.
Log in
To move the rock and free my fellow cat boi's.
Sisyphus?
Existing.
^ A+++
Fantastic question!
First some clarifications...
All human problems stem from politics. Cancer only affects some individuals. A critical meteor would affect all life on Earth. Thus, all big problems that affect all humans are always politically generated.
Most political ideologies are good in theory, but always overlook various aspects and criteria, intentionally or not. The biggest issues they ALL ignore are corruption and secrecy. I would sign up to be a Communist, Democrat, Green, Libertarian, or Republican (or their Canadian equivalent parties) in a heartbeat if any of them could pragmatically and practically deliver on the promise to remove the corruption and secrecy that serves only the entrenched power structures that not only deceive, manipulate, steal, exploit, and murder their own citizens - but all the people of the world.
In short, my dream Amendment would be...
I dream big.
Freedom of speech is already supposed to be a thing. I'd say currency and economic freedom should be a thing too, but that quickly gets complicated - as does the monopoly on violence.
See also:
So basically your top amendment would ban classified information and demand transparency in other areas?
Think we have a chance?
A few years ago I was talking to Sam Tripoli about animating an introduction to his show. It didn't happen. But I could call him back, get him to talk to Jimmy Dore, get Jimmy Dore to talk to Joe Rogan, and get Joe Rogan to talk to Donald Trump, and get Donald Trump to talk to the Zionists running the show - and maybe they might consider our amendment. Maybe.
Six degrees of separatists.
Well this question was part of a larger idea. I was going to ask on right leaning forums, and left leaning forums, and libertarian leaning forums what their top restrictive amendment would be.
The idea is if you took the top request from the right and the top request from the left and married them together you might get an amendment both would support.
I just want to see a restrictive amendment pass again.
The top voted constructive one on the right I got was a requirement that the federal government have nothing to do with private citizens. You only interact with your state. With the exception of if you own a company and it's actually engaged in interstate commerce.
The top voted actually constructive on the left was war is exclusively defensive. No such thing as vague "national interests." We have to be attacked domestically before any war power can be exercised.
Some of them on each forum were so vague I'm going to count them as failing to answer the question. Sentiments more than anything. "No one including the government should be able to profit off of suffering." Ok. If I sell you a sandwich because you were suffering mild hunger did I profit off of suffering? What if it was extreme hunger? Would I not be allowed to sell you a sandwich. That hunger's going to get worse fast. I didn't cause the suffering. Maybe they mean if I do cause the suffering. They said this would apply to government as well. What does it mean for government to profit? Collect taxes? If they obtain money only because of the suffering they would impose on me if I didn't "voluntarily" pay my taxes then is that profit from being someone who causes suffering? How else does government profit? Since they said that is an issue for government they clearly intend to eliminate at least one revenue source for the government. What is there in the government's revenue besides taxes that is suffering based?
Fascinating probing.
"Life is suffering." ~ Buddha
A better way to phrase "ban classified information" would be to expose or free all information.
And just as critically, make "authority" responsible by holding all wrong doers accountable - just as we're held accountable for crimes and offenses, malicious or not, intentional or not.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
Like many things that get out of hand with government they sometime have a root in a seemingly valid issue. Obviously in a time of actual war the government could not be sharing their plans and their own intel about their own units (where are they) in real time on some searchable public database. Classification started for that kind of information. It just grew beyond an acceptable level. But they use the argument of that case to hide all other uses behind.
What if all classified information has to sunset and be public within a year? If it's so critical that an enemy would want the info the enemy probably figured out how to know it within a year on their own. So the US government knows it, and the enemy knows it, we might as well know it.
Seemingly. Excuses.
I defy anyone to find me a "legitimate" war that was based on anything but lies.
There are no real excuses for secrecy, secret agencies, shadow governments, or an unelected non-representative deep state. Or documents classified for 75 years beyond the lifespan of criminal abusers.
I like that sunset idea. It could be a fair interim step between both extremes to soften the transition.
There's no good reason why they should know all about us and us nothing about them. Only evil reasons.