The ‘Dangerous Threat’ of the Constitution: New York Times | I’m Back Home

we now return to our regularly scheduled programming which was apparently Russian propaganda or maybe still is Russian propaganda I don't really know does it only count if I post it over there or does it still count if I post it over here too considering I've been saying mostly the exact same thing for years in case you missed my explanation for and response to those allegations I've now streamed about it for something like 5 hours total and I have a full public statement and explainer in writing on my website link to top the description so now it's back to where I started I will be here on my own channels just like I used to be videos on Wednesdays and Saturdays live streams on Wednesday and Sunday nights with blonde including I expect some debate reaction and Analysis tonight if you enjoy my material and you'd like to help me rebuild you can do that for as little as a buck a month it is most appreciated if you can that support page of my website is linked to top the description too and most excitingly I am now even accepting US dollars not just rubles but I figured I'd pick up not just at home on this channel but at home in topic too first constitutional principles although according to our media Guardians those first constitutional principles are the Russian propaganda the Geniuses over at wired ran a data analysis on the transcripts of all the words that we said over on the foreign meddling Channel and shockingly discovered that among the most commonly uttered two-word phrases across all the videos were free speech First Amendment and the adjudicator of these things the Supreme Court much of that word count built by Yours Truly of course somehow I'm the foreign propagandist sewing Division and Chaos for talking about these fundamental American things and trying desperately to maintain our connection to them according to a media led by our most prominent National newspaper at the same time publishing a think piece saying our constitution is outright dangerous or at least strongly considering and suggesting that possibility if you can't see the game here the people defending and promoting the Constitution are scary and dangerous but the people who would see it destroyed are the trustworthy Patriots somehow the piece was published Labor Day weekend I would have discussed it sooner if my entire reputation in business operation hadn't been thrown into a blender the week prior but the piece explores exactly that argument I'm not exaggerating one of the biggest threats to America's politics might be the basis for America's politics its founding document the Constitution brought to you by the same people who said one of the biggest threats to your health is the air that you breathe mask up so I guess it kind of makes sense exactly how did we get to this upside down well I think you already know the great inverter the one man with the magical ability to make anybody completely reverse their prior alleged principles to oppose him Donald Trump the piece opens by criticizing Trump for threatening to terminate constitutional rules in response to the release of internal Twitter emails showing the silencing of the hunter Biden laptop story before the 2020 election and sure I agree any advocacy of terminating constitutional rules should be strongly scrutinized but that is a standard that has to be applied both ways the standard can't be Trump is bad for disregarding the Constitution but also shouldn't we disregard the Constitution because after all according to this piece it is only through the Constitution that Trump ever even had the presidency in the first place he won the Electoral College despite losing the popular vote as though that is an error and not the intent he appointed three justices to the Supreme Court as the the president isn't supposed to pick them and they're just supposed to be some directly elected super Congress or something two of his justices were confirmed by Senators representing only 44% of the population as though senators were designed to represent the population and not the states and those justices overturned Row versus Wade a Supreme Court decision with which most Americans disagreed so why even have a court at all then why even have constitutional constraints on the decision why don't we just let National polling settle legal disputes better yet let's have a little bit of fun with it let's have a national vote American Idol style but instead of Kelly versus Justin we pick which baby to kill if any it's important for Americans to see these failures stem from the Constitution itself says the eminent legal scholar the dean of the UC Berkeley law school cited in the pece and no I'm not inferring that he changed his entire view of the Constitution solely with reference to Trump he Al but says it his prior book pleaded with progressives not to turn their backs on the Constitution and the courts now he's changed though now the Constitution actually puts the country in grave danger he writes and the only variable in that calculation is the orange super villain and it's not just the subversive message here it's the messenger cuz it's one thing for our country's education system to fail only to the extent that questions that should be day one topics in any High School government or civics class can't be answered by some 20-year-old and an embarrassing Beachside Street interview but it's quite another when that embarrassingly foolish answer has actually ascended to the Dean's office at a top law school and captures the interest of our top journalistic Intrigue these aren't just questions about the basic function of our government these these are questions about the basic philosophy of it why it's organized the way that it is and our top thinkers should be well schooled on that thought when this law school dean says the Constitution is causing failures what exactly does he mean other than Trump failure relative to what intent or what goal well democracy that is the title of the book after all no democracy lasts forever nor should it though democracy was never intended to last a day in this country at least purely speaking to say that the founders failed to protect it is to presume that they wanted to they did not for any debate about whether our country is designed as a democracy or a constitutional republic it's settled by one simple question in a conflict between majority will and moral truth what should win is the purpose of our government to serve the mob or is it to serve the right of the people and Justice and sure we could just reference the Declaration to find the answer easily but we should still be square on understanding why because a person with any connection to moral truth can clearly see the answer through just a moment of critical thought does a vote to do something make that thing inherently Justified you can democratically vote for murder it is still murder you can democratically vote for theft it is still theft the actual Mafia might have a vote for their criminal plan of operation at the mob meeting but that says nothing about whether or not their conduct is Justified so there must be some higher moral truth above the simple vote that our government is designed to Serve and Protect after all why is our constitution so complicated into seven articles and 27 Amendments why doesn't it just say on all political matters a simple majority shall decide and the minority shall take it good and hard it's because of course there are rights of the individual inherent to that person that nobody can justifiably vote to take away we often think about these things in the Bill of Rights context the right to speak the right to defend yourself the right to be secure in your home or your property from unreasonable search and seizure and so forth but that's just one mechanism of protecting that moral truth cuz we often Overlook maybe the more crucial protection mechanism for the rights of a minority and the individual the right to leave and I don't even mean secession from the federal government though I do think that's implied I mean the right to leave a state that's gone insane and to move to a different one cuz after all why do we even have States why are we the United States of America and not just America why does the Electoral College represent States and not people why does each state elect two senators why don't we just have a national popular vote for the top 100 of them so what if they all come from California and New York you Wyoming bumpkins will take it Brokeback Mountain style well at least to the partial point of the Democracy files we have States both to serve and to limit majorities yes the will of the majority in the community should generally be served but not to an abusive extent primarily not at the expense of a minority's right to leave if it sucks in California move over to Nevada and vice versa California will manage their Affairs Nevada will manage theirs and the federal government exists not to boss them around but to protect their Mutual sovereignty and to manage any disputes between them that is the idea this is not some sophisticated nuanced understanding of our constitutional philosophy this is basic stuff that we should all understand as kids before heading off on our own not just how the government works but why it was designed that way cuz after all the Constitutional framers told us exactly this if we actually bother to read what they wrote yes the will of the majority should generally rule to the extent of the government exists at the consent of the Govern but checks on majority tyranny to protect individual and minority rights are just as necessary to preserve liberty and justice for all primarily among those checks the decentralizing function of the states see James Madison in Federalist Papers number 10 to secure private rights against the danger of a faction as in the Pitchfork mob or simple majority rule while also preserving the spirit and the form of popular government you do what you limit the power of the majority by local situation as in preserve local sovereignty or state sovereignty so that people who disagree can head out SpongeBob style to something else C Madison again in fed 51 paraphrased the way that we serve majority will while protecting minority rights is to separate Society into smaller groups so no one majority can dominate everybody and for all the accusations of danger the most dangerous theme about this law school Dean's book at least as characterized by this New York Times analysis is its Benchmark for legitimacy now this is my inference it's not explicitly stated but again what is the difference between the Constitution was awesome yesterday but today it sucks other than this book author law school dean guy didn't get his way politically the measure of justice and stability cannot simply be whether you personally win the moment if just outcomes are only those that favor you and unjust ones are the ones that don't that is not an assessment based on any moral principle that is a toddler's assessment of his own self-interest at the expense of others besides if the Judgment of A System's legitimacy is just whether or not you win well that defies the supposed need for and Val value of democracy Anyway by that reasoning there is no decision to be made at all actually just your will to be imposed and if you think that's an unfair characterization well get back to this author if Trump actually does win the popular vote and see if the arguments remain the same cuz I will comfortably speculate that in that scenario we'll see the same flip and now the new book will be about the danger of majority rule and democracy itself a system where you always win and your opponent always loses is not Justice it is not stability it is not Unity it is just tyranny and yes that is a standard we should hold just as strongly against any candidate who would threaten it not just the ones we oppose and the sooner we unite on that dangerous foreign propaganda principle the better otherwise we will face exactly the sort of Destruction that these people claim to fear but hey at least it'll be Democratic destruction right so what if the world ends as long as slightly more than half of people voted for it thanks as always for listening and for supporting this channel always appreciate that thoughtful discussion down below and especially over on X that is at ml Christensen you're always welcome to coming out and chatting my live streams those are live on Wednesday and Sunday nights looking forward to it goodbye [Music] I [Music]