What IF Citizens Really Understood the U.S. Constitution?

[donnay]

What IF Citizens Really Understood the U.S. Constitution?

Activist Post
March 18th, 2014

By Catherine J. Frompovich

The Internet is rife with all sorts of blogs and sites that talk about cooking, health, politics, and even conspiracy theories, which seem to have become common buzz-words these days. What many Internet surfers apparently may not be aware of is that many sites promote what’s called ‘bum dope’ regarding the interpretation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Mark Dice, a political activist and author, produces sham public opinion polls soliciting signatures on bogus petitions in order to take a read on the pulse of just how little U.S. citizens really know the U.S. Constitution. A classic example of people not knowing what the Constitution and Bill of Rights are about can be seen here.



What is apparent in that video, I think, is that people probably are concerned when they hear frightening issues about freedom and basic rights being presented, but also don’t realize that they are not informed or, perhaps, don’t care enough to make cogent statements or decisions regarding the political health of the current situation in the USA. That truly is a shame!

Probably, we have no one to blame but ourselves, especially since we allowed civics classes to evaporate from the grade school curriculum. I remember as a kid in grammar school, I couldn’t understand why we had to study CIVICS, but we did. I am ever grateful that we had to. Why? Because from an early age I learned to respect the founding documents of our country; what they meant as a template of liberty and independence to others seeking freedom from oppression; and that I had an integral part to play in the role of being a U.S. citizen and how governance was supposed to work. Those lessons I have not been forgotten and, today, seem to be at odds with what I think is going on now.

Currently, we are governed with what’s become a corporate takeover of government by vested interests deciding what’s constitutional that negatively affects the economy, the workplace, education, research, the military, and every aspect of society, commerce, and culture. The puzzling aspect of that string of what some consider constitutional offenses is that many U.S. citizens probably don’t give a tinker’s damn! [1]

If that’s the case, we can remedy that rather easily and at no financial costs. Here’s how: Hillsdale College in Hillsdale, Michigan, offers FREE online Constitution courses that will educate, update, and engage participants about how the U.S. Constitution is a LIVING document, not something that is archaic and needs to be abandoned for something like a new world order, one world order, or the UN’s Agenda 21. Here is the website to register for a free online U.S. Constitution course at Hillsdale College.

To become familiar with Agenda 21, perhaps readers would like to listen to the “Agenda 21 for Dummies” YouTube:



Continued...

[Ronin Truth]

That just might require more than a two day exposure in 8th grade Social Studies class.

[Cabal]

What IF citizens really understood Lysander Spooner?

[tommyrp12]

They just need to understand the preamble. Then they will know "The People" mentioned is not us, it is the States. Lines on paper are sovereign according to that thing.
Is that anything but insane ? Anyone not suffering from the same delusion will be forced to at gun point.

[Quark]

I think it is more important for them to understand the Declaration of Independence.

[donnay]

I think it is more important for them to understand the Declaration of Independence.

I wouldn't say more important, but the DOI is definitely important for the kids to know.

[Quark]

I wouldn't say more important, but the DOI is definitely important for the kids to know.

Well, I think it quite clear today that the anti-federalists were right, and the constitution is a failed experiment. Without the nationalism it brought, we'd likely have experienced a quicker and easier push for small government/no government. While it's interesting to understand some of the principles represented in the constitution, especially in regards to the bill of rights, you find these principles in a purer, more explicit form in the DOI. That is why I personally feel that if we were to choose which to learn first, I'd say the Declaration of Independence. And when I mean learn, I mean learn it with the understanding its authors and signees had.

[heavenlyboy34]

I think it is more important for them to understand the Declaration of Independence.

This^^ Knowing the Constitution makes for interesting trivia, but that's about it. In the real world, it's all irrelevant fluff. (I'm still waiting for someone to take up my Constitutionalist Challenge, btw. Perhaps someone at infowars is interested?)

[donnay]

This^^ Knowing the Constitution makes for interesting trivia, but that's about it. In the real world, it's all irrelevant fluff. (I'm still waiting for someone to take up my Constitutionalist Challenge, btw. Perhaps someone at infowars is interested?)

Showtips@Infowars.com

[Cutlerzzz]

People would be pissed off that the constitution doesn't allow then welfare, government healthcare or retirement, regulate their food, drugs, money, banks, ect..., that te government cannot protect them from scary things like marijuana and guns with prohibition, and would not allow to the USG to control and dominate the world. The constitution would consequently be ignored, and we would be where we are today.

[DamianTV]

We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution. - Lincoln

And what we have arrived at is a Total Perversion of what made this country great for all people.

[Ender]

Well, I think it quite clear today that the anti-federalists were right, and the constitution is a failed experiment. Without the nationalism it brought, we'd likely have experienced a quicker and easier push for small government/no government. While it's interesting to understand some of the principles represented in the constitution, especially in regards to the bill of rights, you find these principles in a purer, more explicit form in the DOI. That is why I personally feel that if we were to choose which to learn first, I'd say the Declaration of Independence. And when I mean learn, I mean learn it with the understanding its authors and signees had.

I agree.

I believe the Declaration to be THE most important document in American history.

[Matt Collins]

if the People understood the Constitution this would happen quite a bit:

[Christopher A. Brown]

Might be asking too much. It appears Americans here are unable to understand that the purpose of free speech is to assure information vital to survival is shared and understood. Or, they might be too afraid in this social setting.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...Of-Free-Speech

[Mini-Me]

What IF citizens really understood Lysander Spooner?

Then we must be talking about an alien society with a tremendously higher average intelligence level.

[Danke]

After understanding we would need the masses to enforce it.

[tod evans]

After understanding we would need the masses to enforce it.

"The masses" aren't permitted to enforce anything..

Their police forces enforce their laws in their courts.

Any questions?

[Spikender]

This^^ Knowing the Constitution makes for interesting trivia, but that's about it. In the real world, it's all irrelevant fluff. (I'm still waiting for someone to take up my Constitutionalist Challenge, btw. Perhaps someone at infowars is interested?)

What is this Constitutionalist Challenge you speak of?

[Ronin Truth]

The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution (Politically Incorrect Guides) [Paperback]

Kevin R. C. Gutzman

Book Description

Publication Date: June 11, 2007 | ISBN-10: 1596985054 | ISBN-13: 978-1596985056 | Edition: 1st
The Constitution of the United States created a representative republic marked by federalism and the separation of powers. Yet numerous federal judges--led by the Supreme Court--have used the Constitution as a blank check to substitute their own views on hot-button issues such as abortion, capital punishment, and samesex marriage for perfectly constitutional laws enacted by We the People through our elected representatives.
Now, The Politically Incorrect Guide(tm) to the Constitution shows that there is very little relationship between the Constitution as ratified by the thirteen original states more than two centuries ago and the "constitutional law" imposed upon us since then. Instead of the system of state-level decision makers and elected officials the Constitution was intended to create, judges have given us a highly centralized system in which bureaucrats and appointed--not elected--officials make most of the important policies.

In The Politically Incorrect Guide(tm) to the Constitution, Professor Kevin Gutzman, who holds advanced degrees in both law and American history:

* explains how the Constitution was understood by the founders who wrote it and the people who ratified it * follows the Supreme Court as it uses the fig leaf of the Constitution to cover its naked usurpation of the rights and powers the Constitution explicitly reserves to the states and to the people * shows how we slid from the Constitution's republican federal government, with its very limited powers, to an unrepublican "judgeocracy" with limitless powers * reveals how huge swaths of American law and society were remade in the wake of Supreme Court rulings * reveals how the Fourteenth Amendment has been twisted to use the Bill of Rights as a check on state power instead of on federal power, as originally intended * exposes the radical inconsistency between "constitutional law" and the rule of law * contends that the judges who receive the most attention in history books are celebrated for acting against the Constitution rather than for it

As Professor Gutzman shows, constitutional law is supposed to apply the Constitution's plain meaning to prevent judges, presidents, and congresses from overstepping their authority. If we want to return to the founding fathers' vision of the Republic, if we want the Constitution enforced in the way it was explained to the people at the time of its ratification, then we have to overcome the "received wisdom" about what constitutional law is. The Politically Incorrect Guide(tm) to the Constitution is an important step in that direction.

[Pericles]

Were it so, it would be clear that John Randolph was correct - Power can only be checked by power. There would be active militias all over the country, and tyrants would be either intimidated or shot.

[Christopher A. Brown]

After understanding we would need the masses to enforce it.

"The masses" aren't permitted to enforce anything..

Their police forces enforce their laws in their courts.

Any questions?

The masses must agree, then violence is not needed. What can they agree upon?

They all share many of the same instincts. Natural law is comprised of instincts. Social instincts creating civil society begin with the purpose of free speech. Agreement upon its purpose empowers peace and cooperation, organization and unity.

NO ONE QUESTIONS THIS COMPETENTLY But no one agrees, meaning either they are insincere, or suffering from a mental emotional disability. Another possibility is social fear.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...Of-Free-Speech

Silence on this fact indicates insincerity or fear. Rejection without reason indicates insincerity. Unreasoned preference for un named alternative actions indicates a mental emotional disability.

[heavenlyboy34]

What is this Constitutionalist Challenge you speak of?

It's to create a coherent legal theory for Constitutionalism. I just now searched for the thread, and it has apparently been deleted by an un-American, fascist person.

[Seraphim]

No subsidy from the government to buy ma FREEDOM FRIES!!


$#@! DAT CONSTERTUTIONTHINGY!!