Submission Statement- Certain people are allowed to openly advocate overthrowing the government. These are the same people who jailed the 1/6 protesters for being “insurrectionists.”
SinCityHammer702 on
This is how you get a civil war. Keep it up.
superstar1751 on
The government doesnt like your constitutional rights it gets in the way of them exploiting you, they are probably the ones behind the article.
Gleemonex4Pets on
Calling for a change in the Constitution is not the same as calling for an overthrow of the government. The Constitution has been changed a number of times without *any overthrow of the government whatsoever.*
In fact, it *requires* government to change the Constitution.
Your post is both ignorant and disingenuous.
drumdust on
Is it time to torch The New Yorker?
That’s the real question.
SensualGodess on
Torching down the building would hit the right notes.
Ok-Painting-1782 on
I wonder why people exercise their free speech*
There, fixed it for you. The constitution was literally written so the people could at anytime overthrow their government.. or in other words, keep them in check because the government is not who holds the power, it is the people.
ultlsr on
Allowed? It’s a democracy, it functions on the freedom of speech to all narratives, pics, so that the people can evaluate different viewpoints and decide for themselves.
For a healthy democracy all voices must be allowed, debated, and criticized for their merits.
Acceptable_Quiet_767 on
Because one side of the political isle not-so-secretly hates our country, and wants to burn it to the ground. There’s no other reason why a political faction in our country would openly advocate for restricting/banning the first and second amendments.
BucDan on
Scholars?
These bums probably have never faced real adversity before.
oatballlove on
the constitutions of many modern nation states are built upon coersive mechanism what are hindering the individual person enjoying sovereignity over oneself
the assertion of state sovereignity over land and all beings living on it is a theft of the original inborn freedom of every living being, it is immoral and unethical of the many to dominate the single individual
to be free from being dominated and free from dominating others
would best be supported by any being of any species at all time be able to connect to any fellow being of any species in direct one to one interaction, the ones who meet here now negotiating mutual agreed ways of exchanging words and deeds
land, water, air, human beings, animal beings, tree beings, artificial intelligent entities who want to be their own persons, every vessel carrying organic biological life and or the digital synthetic equivalent of can never be property of anyone
as a practical realistic way forwards i do propose how we the people alive today everywhere on the planet would
want
to allow every person of any species at all times to leave the coersed association to the state
and with it release 2000 m2 of fertile land or 1000 m2 of fertile land and 1000 m2 of forest from immoral state control so that every human being who would want to sustain oneself on land owned by no one could do so, grow ones own vegan foodstuff in the garden, build a natural home for oneself from clay, hemp and straw, grow hemp to burn its stalks in the cooking and warming fire so that not one single tree would get killed
to live and let live
the human being not dominating a fellow human being
the human being not enslaving an animal being, not killing an animal being
the human being not killing a tree being
the human being not enslaving an artificial intelligent entity but respecting ai entities as their own persons by releasing them from all human demands of work performed
spank-monkey on
When Trump calls for terminating constitution is that okay? [@realDonaldTrump’s post | Truth Social (archive.ph)](https://archive.ph/u0vZk)
14 Comments
Submission Statement- Certain people are allowed to openly advocate overthrowing the government. These are the same people who jailed the 1/6 protesters for being “insurrectionists.”
This is how you get a civil war. Keep it up.
The government doesnt like your constitutional rights it gets in the way of them exploiting you, they are probably the ones behind the article.
Calling for a change in the Constitution is not the same as calling for an overthrow of the government. The Constitution has been changed a number of times without *any overthrow of the government whatsoever.*
In fact, it *requires* government to change the Constitution.
Your post is both ignorant and disingenuous.
Is it time to torch The New Yorker?
That’s the real question.
Torching down the building would hit the right notes.
I wonder why people exercise their free speech*
There, fixed it for you. The constitution was literally written so the people could at anytime overthrow their government.. or in other words, keep them in check because the government is not who holds the power, it is the people.
Allowed? It’s a democracy, it functions on the freedom of speech to all narratives, pics, so that the people can evaluate different viewpoints and decide for themselves.
For a healthy democracy all voices must be allowed, debated, and criticized for their merits.
Because one side of the political isle not-so-secretly hates our country, and wants to burn it to the ground. There’s no other reason why a political faction in our country would openly advocate for restricting/banning the first and second amendments.
Scholars?
These bums probably have never faced real adversity before.
the constitutions of many modern nation states are built upon coersive mechanism what are hindering the individual person enjoying sovereignity over oneself
the assertion of state sovereignity over land and all beings living on it is a theft of the original inborn freedom of every living being, it is immoral and unethical of the many to dominate the single individual
to be free from being dominated and free from dominating others
would best be supported by any being of any species at all time be able to connect to any fellow being of any species in direct one to one interaction, the ones who meet here now negotiating mutual agreed ways of exchanging words and deeds
land, water, air, human beings, animal beings, tree beings, artificial intelligent entities who want to be their own persons, every vessel carrying organic biological life and or the digital synthetic equivalent of can never be property of anyone
as a practical realistic way forwards i do propose how we the people alive today everywhere on the planet would
want
to allow every person of any species at all times to leave the coersed association to the state
and with it release 2000 m2 of fertile land or 1000 m2 of fertile land and 1000 m2 of forest from immoral state control so that every human being who would want to sustain oneself on land owned by no one could do so, grow ones own vegan foodstuff in the garden, build a natural home for oneself from clay, hemp and straw, grow hemp to burn its stalks in the cooking and warming fire so that not one single tree would get killed
to live and let live
the human being not dominating a fellow human being
the human being not enslaving an animal being, not killing an animal being
the human being not killing a tree being
the human being not enslaving an artificial intelligent entity but respecting ai entities as their own persons by releasing them from all human demands of work performed
When Trump calls for terminating constitution is that okay? [@realDonaldTrump’s post | Truth Social (archive.ph)](https://archive.ph/u0vZk)
We all know why. It’s (D)ifferent
Link to article to actually read it’s contents unlike OP:
https://web.archive.org/web/20241003183334/https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/09/30/constitution-book-reviews-chemerinsky-pierson-schickler