Why Constitutions Should Be Questioned

The United States Constitution is a revered document, but some question its continued relevance in modern times. The Constitution, drafted over two hundred years ago, forms the framework for the US government and outlines basic principles such as justice, domestic tranquility, and general welfare. While it has been amended over time, critics argue that certain parts may be obsolete and in need of further revision. The Constitution's age and perceived sanctity make changes difficult, and some argue that it no longer adequately represents the diverse and evolving nature of American society. These tensions between tradition and progress prompt discussions about the document's ongoing suitability as the foundation of American governance.

Explore related products

The Know Your Bill of Rights Book: Don't Lose Your Constitutional Rights--Learn Them!

$8.75 $14.99

The Annotated U.S. Constitution and Declaration of Independence

$21 $21

Constitutional Law as Fiction: Narrative in the Rhetoric of Authority

$24.65 $40.95

Interpreting the Bible & the Constitution (John W. Kluge Center Books)

$34.62 $73

American Covenant: How the Constitution Unified Our Nation―and Could Again

$17.51 $32

The United States Constitution: Two Hundred Years of Anti-Federalist, Abolitionist, Feminist, Muckraking, Progressive, and Especially Socialist Criticism

$21.78 $39

The US Constitution is a 200-year-old document, and parts of it may be obsolete

The US Constitution is over 200 years old, and while it has been amended, some parts may be obsolete and in need of change. The US Constitution was written in 1787 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and it is the framework for the US government. The document is revered as it is seen as the embodiment of the nation's ideals and principles, and it is a source of unity for Americans.

The preamble of the Constitution sets out the intentions of its framers and the purpose of the document. It outlines the basic principles that the framers agreed upon, including establishing justice, domestic tranquility, common defence, and securing liberty. These are noble aspirations, but they are just that—aspirations. The preamble is not the law, and it does not define government powers or individual rights.

While the Constitution has been amended several times, notably with the Bill of Rights, which limits government power and protects individual liberties, it is a document that is difficult to change. The reverence held for the Constitution makes any amendments a challenging process.

The world has changed significantly in the last 200 years, and some parts of the Constitution may no longer be relevant or practical in the modern era. For instance, critics of the Constitution have argued that the federal government it proposes is too large and may be unresponsive to the people. The US is a country built on an idea, and its Constitution is a reflection of that, but it is important to question whether a 200-year-old document is still fit for purpose.

The document is difficult to change due to the reverence it holds

The United States Constitution is a revered document and holds a significant place in the country's history and present. It is the framework for the US government and a symbol of the nation's ideals and values. However, this very reverence can also make it challenging to update and change the document when necessary.

While the US Constitution can be amended, and there are processes in place to do so, the act of altering such a venerated text is not a simple task. The Constitution is seen as a sacred text by many, and any proposed changes are often met with strong resistance and emotional arguments. People may view attempts to change the Constitution as a threat to the very foundations of the nation and its core principles.

The difficulty in amending the Constitution lies in the complex and lengthy amendment process, which requires broad consensus and ratification by a significant majority of states. This process is deliberately challenging, reflecting the importance and weight of any potential changes to the document. However, this complexity also means that the Constitution can struggle to adapt to modern times and the evolving needs of the nation.

Some critics argue that certain parts of the Constitution have become outdated and are no longer suitable for the present day. They question why a nation should be governed by a document that is over two hundred years old. Yet, despite these criticisms and calls for change, the reverence for the Constitution often takes precedence, making it challenging to implement substantial alterations.

In conclusion, while the US Constitution is a revered document that has guided the nation for centuries, the very respect and admiration it commands can also hinder efforts to update and change it. This dynamic between reverence and the need for occasional revisions presents a complex challenge in governing a nation based on a longstanding and venerated text.

The US is a country built on an idea, unlike other countries with shared histories, races, or languages

The United States is unique in that it is a country built on an idea rather than shared histories, races, or languages. Unlike other nations, the US lacks a unifying ethnic, racial, or linguistic identity. Instead, it was founded on the ideals of freedom, democracy, and individual rights, as outlined in its Constitution. This sets the US apart from countries like Germany, which, despite being younger, has a stronger sense of unity due to shared language and geography.

The US Constitution, drafted over two hundred years ago, serves as a framework for governing and a symbol of American ideals. While it can be amended, the reverence Americans hold for it makes changes difficult. This reverence stems from the document's embodiment of the nation's core principles and the belief that it is what unites Americans in the absence of a shared history or ethnicity.

The US Constitution is also significant because it was one of the first governments grounded in Enlightenment thinking. The ideals of the Enlightenment, such as individual rights and limited government, are central to the American experiment. The Constitution's Bill of Rights, for example, protects freedoms of speech, religion, and assembly, reflecting the influence of Enlightenment philosophy.

However, some critics argue that the Constitution's age renders parts of it obsolete and in need of revision. They question why a modern nation should be governed by such an old document, especially when it fails to address contemporary issues. This tension between reverence for the Constitution and the need for change reflects the complex nature of the American political project.

In conclusion, the United States is unique among nations in that it is built on an idea rather than shared ethnic, racial, or linguistic identities. The Constitution, with its Enlightenment-inspired ideals, serves as the foundation of this project. While it is revered as a symbol of America's core principles, it also faces criticism for its age and resistance to change. The ongoing dialogue and debate around the Constitution reflect the dynamic nature of the American experiment and the challenges of governing a diverse nation.

Explore related products

How to Read the Constitution--and Why (Legal Expert Series)

$14.36 $19.99

Philosophy, The Federalist, and the Constitution

$87 $110

The Gulag Archipelago [Volume 1]: An Experiment in Literary Investigation

$10.97 $22.99

The State as a Work of Art: The Cultural Origins of the Constitution

$37

The Limits of Constitutional Democracy (The University Center for Human Values Series Book 37)

$45 $45

Constitutional Patriotism

$42 $47

Americans are shrewd and idealistic, which leads to strange hypocrisy

Americans are a unique people, both shrewd and idealistic, and this can lead to some strange hypocrisy. The United States is a young country, built primarily on an idea and grounded in Enlightenment thinking. This is in contrast to other nations, which are united by commonalities such as history, race, or language. As a result, Americans revere their Constitution and its framers as something that is inherently theirs, despite the document being over two hundred years old and parts of it arguably becoming obsolete.

The Constitution is seen as a framework for governing, and Americans hold it in high regard. However, this same reverence also makes it difficult to change or update, even though the rules allow for amendments. This paradox is a result of Americans' idealism and shrewdness, where they selectively choose when to care or not based on their own interests and benefits.

For example, Americans may advocate for self-determination and independence for a territory like the Falklands, but their government may not actively support or enable such a process if it goes against their interests. This selective idealism can be seen as a form of hypocrisy, where Americans hold strong beliefs but their actions do not always align with those values.

Additionally, Americans' shrewdness and idealism can also be observed in their approach to their own history. They place great importance on restoring buildings to their historical state, even if that history is relatively recent compared to other nations. This is because Americans have a limited history to draw upon, and so they hold tightly to what they have.

In conclusion, Americans' unique blend of shrewdness and idealism can lead to a strange form of hypocrisy, where their actions do not always align with their strongly held beliefs. This paradox is evident in their reverence for the Constitution, their approach to self-determination, and their relationship with their own history.

The Constitution can be updated, but reverence makes it challenging

Constitutions are fundamental to a country's political system, outlining the rules and principles that govern society. While they are important documents, the level of reverence they receive can sometimes be questioned. One reason for this is the challenge of updating them.

The process of amending a constitution varies across countries. In some nations, it requires a simple majority vote in the legislature, while in others, it necessitates a supermajority or even a referendum. These mechanisms are intentionally designed to make constitutional change difficult, ensuring stability and continuity. However, this very difficulty in amending constitutions can lead to challenges when society evolves and new perspectives emerge.

For example, consider the issue of same-sex marriage. In many countries, the original constitution did not explicitly address this topic as it was written at a time when societal norms and legal frameworks differed. As public opinion shifted towards supporting same-sex marriage, the constitutions became barriers to legalisation. This is because the documents were revered as unchangeable, and any attempt to amend them was met with significant opposition.

Another illustration is the ongoing debate over the right to privacy in the digital age. With rapid technological advancements, concerns about government surveillance and data privacy have come to the forefront. While some constitutions do guarantee a right to privacy, the interpretations and implementations of this right vary widely. In countries without an explicit right to privacy in their constitutions, the challenge of updating this foundational document becomes evident, as any proposed changes are scrutinised and contested due to the reverence accorded to the constitution.

The reverence for constitutions is understandable, given their significance in shaping a nation's governance and values. However, this very reverence can also hinder necessary updates. Constitutions should be adaptable to reflect societal changes and evolving perspectives. While stability is essential, so is the ability to amend the constitution when required, ensuring that it remains a living document that serves the needs and aspirations of the people it governs.

Frequently asked questions