The Constitution of the United States of America was originally made to be amended.
In order to prove this, just read the following description provided by the US National Archives:
Constitutional Amendment Process
The authority to amend the Constitution of the United States is derived from Article V of the Constitution. After Congress proposes an amendment, the Archivist of the United States, who heads the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), is charged with responsibility for administering the ratification process under the provisions of 1 U.S.C. 106b. The Archivist has delegated many of the ministerial duties associated with this function to the Director of the Federal Register. Neither Article V of the Constitution nor section 106b describe the ratification process in detail. The Archivist and the Director of the Federal Register follow procedures and customs established by the Secretary of State, who performed these duties until 1950, and the Administrator of General Services, who served in this capacity until NARA assumed responsibility as an independent agency in 1985.
The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures. None of the 27 amendments to the Constitution have been proposed by constitutional convention. The Congress proposes an amendment in the form of a joint resolution. Since the President does not have a constitutional role in the amendment process, the joint resolution does not go to the White House for signature or approval. The original document is forwarded directly to NARA’s Office of the Federal Register (OFR) for processing and publication. The OFR adds legislative history notes to the joint resolution and publishes it in slip law format. The OFR also assembles an information package for the States which includes formal “red-line” copies of the joint resolution, copies of the joint resolution in slip law format, and the statutory procedure for ratification under 1 U.S.C. 106b.
The Archivist submits the proposed amendment to the States for their consideration by sending a letter of notification to each Governor along with the informational material prepared by the OFR. The Governors then formally submit the amendment to their State legislatures or the state calls for a convention, depending on what Congress has specified. In the past, some State legislatures have not waited to receive official notice before taking action on a proposed amendment. When a State ratifies a proposed amendment, it sends the Archivist an original or certified copy of the State action, which is immediately conveyed to the Director of the Federal Register. The OFR examines ratification documents for facial legal sufficiency and an authenticating signature. If the documents are found to be in good order, the Director acknowledges receipt and maintains custody of them. The OFR retains these documents until an amendment is adopted or fails, and then transfers the records to the National Archives for preservation.
A proposed amendment becomes part of the Constitution as soon as it is ratified by three-fourths of the States (38 of 50 States). When the OFR verifies that it has received the required number of authenticated ratification documents, it drafts a formal proclamation for the Archivist to certify that the amendment is valid and has become part of the Constitution. This certification is published in the Federal Register and U.S. Statutes at Large and serves as official notice to the Congress and to the Nation that the amendment process has been completed.
Moreover, the US Constitution has been amended many times.
In order to prove this, here is a brief summary of the 27 ratified amendments:
I repeat, the US Constitution was originally made to be amended and has been amended many times.
Now, why has the Constitution been amended?
I draw your special attention to the 13th, 14th, 18th, 19th, and 21st amendments.
These amendments abolished slavery, introduced Prohibition of the manufacture or sale of alcohol, abolished the denial of the right to vote based on sex, and repealed Prohibition.
In other words, the US Constitution has been amended whenever the American people collectively deem that the existing Constitution is rationally unjustified and immoral, and must be changed for the better.
Now in my opinion, the US Electoral College and the Second Amendment are both rationally unjustified and immoral.
First, the Electoral College is blatantly undemocratic, since it enables a small minority of the American people — 538, to be precise — to override the will of the majority of the people, as was scandalously proved by the 2016 election of So-Called POTUS Donald Trump by a significant minority of all those who voted.
Second, here are two simple but decisive arguments against the ownership and use of guns and the Second Amendment, and for gun abolitionism.
First Argument for Gun Abolitionism
1. Coercion is forcing people to do things, by using violence or the threat of violence.
2. Coercion is always rationally unjustified and immoral, because it treats people as mere instruments and mere things, and directly violates their human dignity.
3. The primary functions of guns is coercion.
4. Therefore, owning and using guns is rationally unjustified and immoral.
5. But the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution entrenches the right to own and use guns.
6. Therefore, the 2nd Amendment is rationally justified and immoral, and should be repealed.
7. Therefore, gun abolitionism is rationally justified, morally right, and what we ought to do.
Second Argument for Gun Abolitionism
Have you ever wondered how many people have been killed by guns within the borders of the USA since 1776?
Since 1968, more than 1.5 million people have been killed by guns.
Since the American Revolution, 1.4 million people have died in wars on US soil, most of them by means of guns.
That’s close to 2.9 million people killed by guns over a period spanning roughly one-quarter of US political history, i.e., roughly 60 years.
Now, how many people were killed by guns in the USA during the 192 years between 1776 and 1968, but not in wars?
Let’s say, conservatively, 3 million people.
That would mean that the total number of people killed by guns in the history of the USA is roughly the same as the number of people murdered by the Nazis during the Holocaust, i.e., somewhere between 5 and 6 million.
If gun violence is not a fundamental source of human oppression in the USA, then nothing is.
So I am saying that slavery is morally abhorrent, and, for logically independent but also highly analogous reasons, that gun violence is morally abhorrent too.
Moreover, the morally half-hearted and politically expedient 21st century so-called “liberal” doctrine of gun-control is strictly analogous to the morally half-hearted and politically expedient pre-Civil War so-called “progressive” doctrine of abolishing slavery in all states except where it already existed.
If slavery is wrong, then it’s wrong everywhere, and should be abolished everywhere; if gun violence is wrong, then owning and using guns is wrong everywhere, and should be abolished everywhere.
The fact that some gun-owners don’t actually kill other people or themselves with their guns no more morally counts against the abolition of guns than the fact that some slave-owners treated their slaves well morally counted against the abolition of slavery.
Therefore, gun abolitionism is rationally justified, morally right, and what we ought to do.
Assuming that my arguments are sound, then it seems to me that only one big thing stands between (i) the fact that the Electoral College and the Second Amendment are both rationally unjustified and immoral and (ii) amending the US Constitution in order to abolish both of them.
And this one big thing is the collective mental illness of the American people, namely, a form of anosognosia, powered by the myth of American exceptionalism and enabled by the mass and social media, consisting in most Americans’ inability and refusal to recognize that the USA is tragically morally and political flawed in five fundamental ways and most urgently needs to be fixed.
In my opinion, for all the reasons I’ve given, the most effective way of beginning to fix the USA would be to amend the US Constitution so as to abolish both the Electoral College and the Second Amendment.
But in order to do that, Americans must admit to themselves that the US Constitution was originally made to be amended and has been amended many times.
And in order to do that, the American people must admit to themselves that they have a collective mental illness consisting in their inability and refusal to recognize that the USA is tragically morally and politically flawed in five fundamental ways and most urgently needs to be fixed.
In other words, the process of amending the US Constitution is fundamentally a cognitive and emotional process: it’s fundamentally mental.
For in order for us to begin the process of fixing the USA by amending the US Constitution, we must cognitively and emotionally amend the way our minds are responding anosognosically to our collective moral and political disease.
We must be able to say to ourselves, with fully honest self-recognition and self-commitment, like the Alcoholics Anonymous member who begins by saying “I’m ___ and I’m an alcoholic”:
(i) We’re Americans and we have a collective mental illness consisting in our inability and refusal to recognize that the USA is tragically morally and politically flawed in five fundamental ways and most urgently needs to be fixed
(ii) The US Constitution was originally made to be amended and has been amended many times.
(iii) The Electoral College and the Second Amendment are both rationally justified and immoral.
(iv) So the most effective way of beginning to fix the USA is to amend the US Constitution so as to abolish both the Electoral College and the Second Amendment.
Then, once that transformative event of mental self-healing has happened, everything else will fall into place.
And, as always, to anyone who seriously disputes the soundness of this argument,
Je vous dis, merde!
“Je vous dis, merde!” (literally, “I say to you: shit!” or more loosely, “You’re so full of shit!”) is a morally and politically defiant slogan invented and first published by an early 20th-century Catalan anarchist who used the nom de guerre “Miguel Almereyda.” Almereyda, who was murdered in a French prison in 1917, was also the father of the famous French film director Jean Vigo, who immortalized the same slogan in his breakthrough 1933 film, Zéro de conduite, aka Zero for Conduct.
1. Universal Respect for Human Dignity (URHD):
· Human dignity is the absolute non-denumerable moral value of every member of humanity, and everyone ought to try wholeheartedly to treat everyone else in a way that is sufficient to meet the demands of respect for human dignity, especially including (i) alleviating or ending human oppression, and (ii) actively engaging in mutual aid and mutual kindness.
2. Universal Basic Income (UBI):
· Anyone 21 years of age or over and living permanently in the USA, who has a personal yearly income of $50,000.00 USD or less, and who is capable of requesting their UBI, would receive $25,000.00 USD per year, with no strings attached.
3. A 15-Hour Workweek for Understaffed Non-Bullshit Jobs (FHW-for-UNBJs):
· Anyone 18 years of age or older who is living permanently in the USA, who has completed a high school education, and is mentally and physically capable of doing a job, would be offered an eco-job, paying a yearly wage of $25,000.00 USD, for fifteen hours of work (three 5-hour days) per week.
Thus anyone 21 years of age or older with a high-school degree and who is also mentally and physically capable of working, would have a guaranteed yearly income of at least $50,000.00 USD if they chose to do an eco-job.
The rationale behind the three-year gap between (i) being offered an eco-job at 18 and (ii) beginning to receive their UBI at 21, is that every young adult who has finished high school will have the option of pursuing three years of part-time or full-time free higher education without credentialing, i.e., for its own sake, after high school, before making longer-term decisions about what I call job-work and life-work.
Here are a few more details about UBI and eco-jobs.
(i) The UBI is to be paid by a monthly stipend check.
(ii) Eco-job income is not taxed.
(iii) For all individual yearly incomes of $50,000.00 USD or under, no tax will be levied; hence for someone receiving their UBI and also doing an eco-job, no income tax will be levied.
(iv) For all individual non-eco-job incomes, for every $1.00 USD earned above the standard UBI of $25,000.00 USD, the monthly UBI stipend is reduced by 50 cents, until the recipient’s UBI is reduced to zero; hence for those individuals with yearly non-eco-job incomes equal to or under $50,000.00 USD, the maximum UBI + non-eco-job income sum is always $50,000.00 USD.
(v) For all individual yearly incomes over $50,000.00 USD, for every $10,000.00 USD earned, that surplus income is taxed at the rate of 1%, with the highest surplus income tax rate being 50%; hence the maximum surplus 50% tax rate starts at individual yearly incomes of $550,000.00 USD, and applies to all higher surplus incomes.
4. Universal Free Higher Education Without Credentialing (HEWC):
· Everyone would be offered, beyond their high-school education, a free, three-year minimum, optional (but also open-ended beyond those three years, as a further option), part-time or full-time universal public education program in the so-called “liberal arts,” and also in some of the so-called “STEM” fields, including the humanities, the fine arts, the social sciences, mathematics, and the natural sciences.
· For many or even most people, their HEWC would fall between (i) the end of their high school education at age 18 and the corresponding availability of eco-jobs, and (ii) the beginning of their UBI at age 21.
· But HEWC would be open to anyone with a high school degree, no matter how old they are, provided they are mentally and physically capable of doing the program.
5. Universal Free Healthcare (UFH):
· Every human person living permanently in the USA will receive free lifelong healthcare.
6. 2-Phase Universal Open Borders (2P-UOB):
· Phase 1: Starting in 2021, there will be universal open borders with Canada and Mexico, and everyone who moves across those borders and then claims residence in the USA, will receive temporary or permanent residence in the USA and also full membership in the system of UBI, FHW-for-UNBJs/eco-jobs, and UFH in the USA, with the precise number of new temporary or permanent residents to depend on the current availability of (i) adequate funding for UBI, eco-jobs, and UFH , and (ii) adequate living accommodation, in the USA, provided that all new residents also fully respect the human dignity of everyone else in the USA and elsewhere in the world.
· Phase 2: Also starting in 2021, the USA, Canada, and Mexico will collectively form a Global Refugee Consortium (GRC), with three-way open borders to any political refugee, economic refugee, or asylum seeker from anywhere in the world (aka “global refugees”), who will receive temporary or permanent residence in the USA, Canada, or Mexico, and also full membership in the system of UBI, FHW-for-UNBJs/eco-jobs, and UFH in the three GRC countries, with the precise number of new temporary or permanent residents, and the precise distribution of new residents among the three members of the GRC, to depend on the current availability of (i) funding for UBI, eco-jobs, and UFH , and (ii) adequate living accommodation, in the three GRC countries, provided that all new residents also fully respect the human dignity of everyone else in the GRC and elsewhere in the world.
7. Universal No-Guns (UNG):
· No one in the USA, including police, internal security forces of all kinds, armies, and intelligence forces of all kinds, has the moral right to possess or use guns of any kind, for any purpose whatsoever, because the primary function of guns is coercion, and coercion is immoral.
· UNG would be implemented by repealing the Second Amendment to the US Constitution in 2021 and then universally banning the possession or use of guns thereafter.
I’m also assuming that Universal Public Education (UPE) — universal free access for all human persons of any age to good public education up to the end of high school — already exists in most countries, and needs no further justification.
Where UPE does not already exist, it would automatically become a necessary part of the seven-part WTFU Party package, thereby making it a eight-part package.
Mr Nemo, Nowhere, NA, 27 October 2017