• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

What Liberals and Conservatives Agree on...

Koldo

Outstanding Member
Wrong. See the Constitutional Convention. The EC was key to even getting former colonies on board with the idea of a unified nation in the form of a republic.

Which is completely besides the point.
The fact that something was necessary at a given point in time, and NOT per definition, is irrelevant as whether it is necessary nowadays.

So? I am talking about the US Constitution and it's history.

Which is completely irrelevant as to whether the United States would need an EC to remain the United States.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
No as the Republic of the USA was formed by sovereign independent former colonies in which the EC is the system required to even form the basic idea of the Fed government. The FEd which has limitations. Sovereign states gave up a part of their power to a unified government but not all power. To change the system removes a part of that power States never gave up which is States choose POTUS not a national population as a whole.
I don't buy it.
The popular vote still gives power to the states,
but it's just not consolidated & concentrated
for one candidate.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
I don't buy it.
The popular vote still gives power to the states

No as the voting method shift from state populations to national thus gives more power than currently to populous states while removed the little power smaller states have.


but it's just not consolidated & concentrated
for one candidate.

Nope, see above. You are conflating campaign strategy based on voting habit with state power in the EC itself. Some cities have a larger voting population than whole states.
 

dfnj

Well-Known Member
In these polarised times, it is worth keeping in mind that from the age of enlightenment up until the new deal in the 1930s, what we now consider to be "liberals" and "conservatives" were basically the same. Even today, they remain committed to roughly the same liberal, democratic system but with some differences on the degree of government intervention in the economy and society and the extent of individual liberties.

Here's some things both (American) Liberals and Conservatives will probably agree on. Whilst you may not agree with everyone, or might have some reservations about each of them, chances are you agree with most of them.
  1. The United States should be Republic with an elected head of state.
  2. Rejection of hereditary titles of nobility
  3. No religion should become an established religion with offical privallages or recognition
  4. The seperation of powers between executive, legislative and judical branches of government
  5. The independence of the judiciary from political interference (such as the executive)
  6. The rule of law
  7. The Presumption of innocence and the burden of proof on the accuser
  8. Civillan control of the military and opposing military coups and dictatorships in the USA.
  9. The abolition of slavery and the slave trade
  10. Opposition to Child Labour
  11. Legal equality on the basis of gender, race and religion and rejection of segregation and discrimination by the state
  12. Freedom of the Press
  13. Freedom of Speech
  14. Freedom to peaceably assemble and the right to protest
  15. Freedom of Religion and religious tolerance
  16. The Right to Own Property
  17. The Right to Exchange, Buy and Sell Property
  18. The right to vote in free, fair and competitive elections with multiple parties (and that a one-party state isn't a "real" democracy and cannot represent the people)
  19. The right to privacy and opposition to mass survaillance by governments and corporations
  20. Government should not regulate people's sexual activities in the bedroom
What else do Liberals and Conservatives agree on? Can you think of any others? o_O

The 1936 words of FDR ring more true today than when they were spoken after the Great Depression:

"An old English judge once said: 'Necessitous men are not free men.' Liberty requires opportunity to make a living - a living decent according to the standard of the time, a living which gives man not only enough to live by, but something to live for. For too many of us the political equality we once had won was meaningless in the face of economic inequality. A small group had concentrated into their own hands an almost complete control over other people's property, other people's money, other people's labor - other people's lives. For too many of us life was no longer free; liberty no longer real; men could no longer follow the pursuit of happiness. Against economic tyranny such as this, the American citizen could appeal only to the organized power of government."
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
No as the voting method shift from state populations to national thus gives more power than currently to populous states while removed the little power smaller states have.




Nope, see above. You are conflating campaign strategy based on voting habit with state power in the EC itself. Some cities have a larger voting population than whole states.
I understand that the popular vote curbs state power somewhat.
But it still allows for a republic to exist. The loss of state autonomy
is due more to SCOTUS infringement, primarily massive expansion
of power under the Interstate Commerce Clause.
 

Shad

Veteran Member
I understand that the popular vote curbs state power somewhat.
But it still allows for a republic to exist.


Not as the USA. It would just be America then. Hence why I am bring up history.

The loss of state autonomy is due more to SCOTUS infringement, primarily massive expansion
of power under the Interstate Commerce Clause.

Sure but that is a separate issues while not removing a fundamental point of the Constitution Convention and formation of the Fed itself
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Not as the USA. It would just be America then. Hence why I am bring up history.
If we amended the Constitution to replace the EC with the popular vote, I say
we'd still be a republic. Less so, but the EC is just one element of being one.
Sure but that is a separate issues while not removing a fundamental point of the Constitution Convention and formation of the Fed itself
When the USSC contravenes the Constitution, amending it by
fiat in ways which transfer rights from the states to the federal
government, this is indeed a threat to the republic.
 
Top