I am not a Native American or an aboriginal, but like them, I was born on Turtle Island. Turtle Island is North America. Not a country, not a residency for certain designated citizens based on an artificial border. It is a great continent with endless space that is bound only by the world’s greatest oceans. It is my home. My ancestors are buried here. My forefathers are remembered in place names all across the continent.
Why didn’t Geronimo just peacefully go live on the reservation when threatened by a superior force? Or Crazy Horse, or Sitting Bull, or Red Cloud? What happened to the Sioux Indian leader Big Foot and his people when they finally, compliantly, turned themselves over to the US army at Wounded Knee? Should they have fled across the border to Canada with many of their brothers and sisters? What do you think happened to the Indians who fled to Canada? Do you think they are better off in their tuberculosis-riddled reserves than the Indians in the US? Ask the Inuit in Davis Inlet. Ask the people spending their – what, third?- winter in leaky tents in Attawapiskat. Are they getting fair treatment by the Canadian government?
Every government tends toward tyranny, and they all see citizens as little more than geese useful only for repeated plucking.
But America is the only place – the only place – where the key question of the role that the government should play in men’s lives is openly, freely and peacefully debated, for the whole world to observe. The 2012 election is entirely about the answer to this question. Do you think this question is being asked about the Canadian government? Canadians often seem content to smirk at those crazy Americans who debate silly issues like taxing the rich, or whether to expand the fraud-ridden Medicare health program to everybody in order to achieve “universal health care” , or whether to raise the debt ceiling before the rating agencies downgrade America’s credit rating. Canadians sometimes observe this with – admit it – a sense of moral superiority over those Americans who think they are “exceptional”. But Canadians seem willing to submit to whatever their government does, because they think somehow that politicians know what is best for everybody, forgetting that the real argument about taxing the rich is protecting property rights for everyone, not plundering whoever has the most money this week; that the health care issue is about patients having choices about their own health, rather than accepting whatever restricted care the government says you get to have; and the debt ceiling debate was about the crucial issue of whether there is any limit to government spending of the people’s money. That is the major difference between our two countries – the clamorous debate in the US about crucial philosophical issues regarding the proper role and size of government.
The parliamentary system, which seems to be the most widespread form of democratic government in the world today, was formulated centuries ago so that, when the government fell, the new government would be chosen by the wealthy landowners, who often had land and money and power and armies that rivaled or exceeded the king’s. The ordinary people didn’t count, and they still count less today than ordinary people in the United States. Canadians only vote once every few years depending on when somebody else decides to hold an election. Canadians only elect a local representative, who owes fealty and loyalty to the head of their party. Elections in a parliamentary system result in serial dictatorships, unless there is a minority government, when the parliamentary goings-on are still only something the people observe and cannot often influence.
What is exceptional about America is not that the people are better, or that the government is wiser, or even that it is the richest and most powerful nation in the world – for now. Empires rise, and inevitably they fall. What is exceptional is the form of government, based on the documents we all know about: the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, powerfully reiterated by the Gettysburg Address. What is exceptional is the system of checks and balances, and the means of amending the Constitution, which were designed to keep the government in check and maximize the freedom of the people to live their lives as they please.
America is exceptional because it is the only country that was built on an idea, and that idea implies a promise. The idea is that all men and all women are created free and equal and that a proper government is one made up of freely elected peers, in which any citizen – * any * citizen – may run for public office. The promise is that because of that idea, anyone has the right to do whatever he or she chooses to do in order to improve her lot in life and live as she wishes, beholden to no monarch or officer or class structure for her future or her fortune. She is not promised happiness – only the lifelong freedom, the natural-born right to pursue it in her own way.
The arguments that are going on, in and outside of the US, about what the US government is doing are watched by a world in which most people are not free. These arguments teach people all over the world about what rights and freedoms they should *all* have. In many places in the world it is treason to even talk about how tyrannical the local government is. What happens in America matters, because if freedom and individual rights can be protected, maintained, and recovered when lost in America, then all people will see clearly what is possible to them.
These things are worth the battle. But I cannot be part of that fight, the fight to make every human being an exceptional one, if I renounce my American citizenship. There is simply no other country in the world where that sort of language is understood and honored and enshrined in its founding documents. If I renounce, I walk away from those words. I turn my back on that idea. I was born into that promise, and I intend to pursue it until my dying day.
Interesting but foolhardy. Yes, the natives in Canada do have some very big problems but after working on one of their reserves I can tell you that the assets that they have at their disposal are much greater than those that are enjoyed by Natives in America. A lot of the problems on Canadian reserves are the result of their own mismanagement and their communties cultural stubbroness. The Natives run their reserves like Third World governments. They squander the monies that are given them and then they whine about not having enough.
The Reserve system itself is a system that cannot ever produce the wealth that a modern economy can generate, yet they refuse to give it up. As was shown under Communism, the holding of land in common by a community will lead no where. I have watched new houses and schools go up on our nearby reserve and have then watched the community tear down those same buildings. The White man is not to blame for the Native problem but rather the clash of cultures that is till going on. A pre-literate society cannot exist alongside a literate society and prosper.
Health Care-
The fact that America refuses to solve its healthcare problems is a travesty. America may have cheap food but cheap food won’t pay your price of admission to a doctor’s office or cancer treatment. Canada’s health care system does not tell people what doctor or hospital they must use. The notion that it does is deliberate misinformation that is disseminated by American Right Wing demagogues who play on their constituents lack of knowledge.
American has a cruel system for rationing health care- called private insurance. The private health insurers decide what kind of policy you will get or even if you will be offered a policy at all. Age, gender, income level, employment status are some of the things that arbitrarily dictate the quality of your health care. American health care isn’t delivered according to the patients need but the ability to pay. Have you reached your yearly claim limit yet? Have you reached your life time claim limit? What pre-existing condition do you have? Did you divulge everything on your application? If I am a doctor who accepts Medicare patients then I have to ask myself how many do them do I want as clients. Many doctors will not accept Medicare patients into their practise. 46 million uninsured Americans is a lot a health care rationing.
Is America a free country or is it not. America is progressively getting to be less free. They are building fences on both their borders in order to keep illegal immigrants out but who is asking this question, why can’t the fences just as easily turn into instruments that keep people in? American has adopted public institutions that everyday walk on the freedoms of its citizens. These institutions go by such comforting names as: The Patriot Act, Homeland Security, National Defence Authorization Act (NDAA) which allows one man, the President, to indefinitely detain American citizens without trial. Even the application of this latter law to non U.S. citizens is a violation of American principles such as due process, laws of evidence etc. Take into consideration the U.S. assault on the Internet with the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) which allows the Justice department to unilaterally shut down any Internet address that IT believes is violating U.S. copyright law. And then there is FATCA which is the most extensive case of extraterritorial legislation that has ever been proposed and the corresponding infringement of the rights of expat Americans.
The U.S. election system is nice in that its elections are held on a regular basis but the elections aren’t the most important part of U.S. democracy. The U.S. government is not run by the vote but by lobbyist who have the ears of the politicians in Washington and local governments. Why is it that so many of the members of Congress are able to amass so much wealth while they are in office?
No, the U.S. is not a free society. It is actually morphing into the image of its old enemy the Soviet Union. Stalin, Lenin, Mao and Kim Jung Ill would be proud of what the U.S. has become.
I have tried to live my life abroad according to this principle, “Love where you’re from but bloom where you’re planted.” I love the city of Seattle. I love visiting my parent’s farm in Oregon. Only in the U.S. can I visit the cemetery where my recent ancestors are buried. But I love my country of residence too and I admire the values of her founders: Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. I’ve tried to teach my bi-national children that both countries have admirable values that are worth supporting and defending.
Foxladyhawk, if the Constitution and Bill or Rights were actually respected, *** this website would most likely not exist! *** Today they are just old documents in a museum, sometimes mentioned to evoke a sense of patriotism.
Maybe you remember America from long ago. Unfortunately, it’s not the way anymore. Sense the fall of communism, Americans are the most restricted people that I know of, especially considering that American law follows an American anywhere he/she may go. They don’t care if you are too busy worrying about the laws of the land where you live.
When I mention these things to my parents, they just say “Uh… well, the country is going broke..” They usually make no comment when I mention how their civil liberities are being trampled on.
The simple idea that “the president” can invoke the T-word (terrorism) and basically detain, torture, even execute a fellow American citizen anywhere in the world without due process or even a trial is just beyond words for me. The last people who had that “privilege” were the monarchs or England during the late Middle Ages. Do you think the Founding Fathers would approve of this?
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but please, remove your hands from your ears and pay attention close attention to the news, both good and bad.
Ladyhawk: This is a beautiful essay. It is about how US’s founding documents enshrine important freedoms and ideals, and I agree. I am much more in favor of the negative rights–what government can’t do to you–than I am of postive rights, what the government must do for you. The US constitution and the Declaration of Independence are about liberty and being free from government.
I admire your determination not to retreat or back down. If the United States government wasn’t try to reach into the pockets of my Canadian only wife, I would have perhaps remained an American too. But my first duty is to protect my wife, then the community in which l live (which is Canada since 1994). That is why I found it necessary to relinquish my citizenship. Everyone of us must come up with our own solutions to these problems. But this site exists so that we can work together towards our common interests.
However, I am a little nonplussed by your apparent fuss with the parlimentary system. It seems to me, in the end, whether your system is parlimentary, one of divided constitutional powers like the United States system, or even monarchical, what matters is the quality of the leaders. At present, I have more confidence in Canada’s leaders than those in the US. But I compare the coercive tax system in the US and the coercive tax system in Canada, they are just like two mafia bosses. The question is: which mob boss do I owe allegiance to? Is it Canada or the US. Isn’t the US wanting to shake me down sort of like the New York mafia coming to New Jersey? Shouldn’t Tony protect me from them–since I’m paying him protection money?
Thanks again
This Youtube video is the sort of thing I’m talking about: Richie Aprile gets out of jail. His brother was the New Jersey mob boss before his death. Tony Soprano took over operations before Richie gets out of prison. Now out of prison, Richie is reclaiming his territory. Warning, vulgar language and violence.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ccXjveaW40w&NR=1]
Deep down, I feel similarly. I am loyal. I am just going to have to grit my teeth and bear it in term of the ongoing compliance burden…money is not everything to me…honour is more important.
However, I will continue to criticize Fatca and citizenship-based taxation. But if the worst comes to the worst, I will regard it as my cross…
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-7gpgXNWYI&w=420&h=315%5D
You may recall the debate between the candidates for Vice-President in October of 1988. Here is some background:
“After Quayle became Bush’s vice presidential running mate, questions were raised in the press about his age (he was 41 at the time); his limited term of service in the Senate; his grades in college; his National Guard duty (which Democrats claimed helped him avoid serving in the military during the Vietnam War);[2][3] and his overall ability to lead the nation in the case of the incapacitation of the President, which became a central issue in the 1988 debate.”
“The relevant portion of that transcript (of the debate) follows:
Tom Brokaw: Senator Quayle, I don’t mean to beat this drum until it has no more sound in it. But to follow up on Brit Hume’s question, when you said that it was a hypothetical situation, it is, sir, after all, the reason that we’re here tonight, because you are running not just for Vice President — (Applause) — and if you cite the experience that you had in Congress, surely you must have some plan in mind about what you would do if it fell to you to become President of the United States, as it has to so many Vice Presidents just in the last 25 years or so.
Quayle: Let me try to answer the question one more time. I think this is the fourth time that I’ve had this question.
Brokaw: The third time.
Quayle: Three times that I’ve had this question — and I will try to answer it again for you, as clearly as I can, because the question you’re asking is, “What kind of qualifications does Dan Quayle have to be president,” “What kind of qualifications do I have,” and “What would I do in this kind of a situation?” And what would I do in this situation? […] I have far more experience than many others that sought the office of vice president of this country. I have as much experience in the Congress as Jack Kennedy did when he sought the presidency. I will be prepared to deal with the people in the Bush administration, if that unfortunate event would ever occur.
Judy Woodruff: Senator [Bentsen]?
Bentsen: Senator, I served with Jack Kennedy, I knew Jack Kennedy, Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you’re no Jack Kennedy. (Prolonged shouts and applause.) What has to be done in a situation like that is to call in the —
Woodruff: (Admonishing applauders) Please, please, once again you are only taking time away from your own candidate.
Quayle: That was really uncalled for, Senator. (Shouts and applause.)
Bentsen: You are the one that was making the comparison, Senator — and I’m one who knew him well. And frankly I think you are so far apart in the objectives you choose for your country that I did not think the comparison was well-taken.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senator,_you%27re_no_Jack_Kennedy
This pretty much ended the debate with Quayle the clear loser. But, it didn’t have to end this way. Quayle had an easy response (if he had thought of it). That response was:
“Jack Kennedy was no Jack Kennedy either.”
The point is that when it came to President Kennedy, the myth was far greater than the man.
When it comes to the United States the myth of the constitution and founding fathers has nothing to do with America today. The country has been hijacked by political leaders who do not believe in liberty and democracy. The people have allowed this because they don’t believe in it either.
The same is true of the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and Gettysburg Address. They are fantastic documents. Too bad the U.S. doesn’t pay attention to them. The only candidate for President who even believes in the freedom and democracy espoused in these documents is Ron Paul (and he is considered to be unelectable). A couple of points in relation to freedom and democracy in the United States:
First democracy:
It is run by the Democratic and Republican parties. A “two party state” is only one party removed from a “one party state”. Furthermore, the Democratic and Republican parties are nothing but private clubs. Incidentally, America’s first president George Washington was distrustful of political parties and loathed him. There is no place in the U.S. political process for anybody not associated with the parties. Check out independentvoting.org. From the perspective of the voter, in many states you are actually required to register to vote. As an “expat” is it easy for you to vote?
Freedom:
Here are a few odds and ends about the “land of free”
– it has a higher percentage of people in jail than almost any other country in the world
– it murders its own citizens (called the death penalty)
– it confiscates the savings of its citizens living abroad (one of the reasons for this blog).
Now, I agree that the ideals in the Declaration, Constitution are beautiful and lofty ideals. But these ideals are not uniquely American – they belong to people of moral virtue the world over. The ideals will always exist and the Obamas will come and go. I am certainly loyal to these ideals. The U.S. is a political entity. I believe that patriotism means loyalty to ideals – not loyal to a political entity. It the loyalty to the ideals that leads me to the conclusion that true Patriotism not only allows for but may require renunciation. Here is a post that I recently wrote on this issue. The founding fathers took their lofty ideals to a new country. Perhaps those who believe in those same ideals need to find a new place to live them.
http://renounceuscitizenship.wordpress.com/2011/12/07/patriotism-and-renunciation-of-u-s-citizenship/
Thank you for a very well written post. I share your obvious pain. I also remember a time when the United States was a different country. But, it’s long gone and it is not coming back in our lifetimes.
Your post spends a lot of time talking about Canada and the parliamentary political system. All governments are nothing but organized force. The form of government (whether Republic or Monarchy, etc.) is just an expression of who exercises force – not the extent to which force is exercised. At the present time, I think Canada offers more freedom. There is no right in the U.S. constitution for U.S. citizens to either leave (they are talking about building walls) or enter the country. Contrast that with S. 6 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which gives Canadian citizens a constitutional right to enter and leave Canada – and this comes from a system of parliamentary democracy.
“Mobility Rights
Mobility of citizens
6. (1) Every citizen of Canada has the right to enter, remain in and leave Canada.”
.
tried to get this YouTube video in the top of my comment – don’t seem to know how. But, here is the video of relevant portion of the debate.
Democracy and democratic institutions have been evolving since the Magna Carta. We could engage in endless tit for tat about which country has the best form, the most stirring documents and best promotes our shared values.
Renounciation is not an intellectual exercise but a deeply personal one.
During the second Lebanon War, there was musch discussion about citizenships of conviniece.
I have concluded that is both dishonest and unethical carry possess a US passport and claim any benfits of citizenship of a country to which I feel no allegence.
I have always had a deep affection and attachment to Canada. We lived in a area with a strong French-Canadian presence. There were seven French Canadian parishes. My family often attended mass at Notre Dame des Canadiens church. We had our own parish schools and a French Canadian HS which I attended. Eveyone spoke French and hap parent and grandparents from Quebec. We were as proud of the country our ancesters built, as we were of the land of our birth.
As important as the above are in my decision to renounce, the most compelling reason is simply this: Canada is where the heart is. It is not just my residence, it is my home. I proudly identify myselt as a Canadian where ever I go. My life is here, it is my source of inspiration. In the end I will be buried here.
Thank you all for your thoughtful responses. I stand by my post. If you want to understand more about how my thinking has been shaped, please read my story:
http://isaacbrocksociety.com/2011/12/30/my-story-3/
There are many valid ways for a US citizen to respond to what is happening to us. Each one of us must make a profoundly personal and difficult decision about what shall be our relationship with the United States. There is no wrong choice. Renouncing may the the right decision for you. It is not the right decision for me. When the moneychangers took over the temple, Jesus didn’t say, “I think I’ll become a Muslim.”
My message is not “America is better than Canada.”
My message is “I’m not renouncing.”
Ladyhawk wrote: When the moneychangers took over the temple, Jesus didn’t say, “I think I’ll become a Muslim.” LOL
Precisely. Thank you for emphasizing my point, which I perhaps did not make as gracefully as you.
Interesting, and I feel the same allegiance to the core documents on which our republic (not democracy!) was founded. However, while you still hold out hope, I grieve for what is now dead. Those documents, in particular our Bill of Rights, are on their last breaths.
We have been taken over by the Big Money Conglomerates who own all branches of government, so we no longer have checks or balances. The debt is now officially over 15 trillion, and if all obligations are included it is probably closer to 10 times that amount. The strength of the US for the past century was due in large part to the fact that the US dollar was the world reserve currency. The un-Constitutional Federal Reserve and the politicians of both parties are engineering the destruction of the dollar and the impoverishment and enslavement of Americans. The middle class is being wiped out. The advances in civil society and legal precedent our once-great country established over the last two centuries are being fragmented, starved, and tossed to the wind. The younger generation has no memory of, or even desire to remember, what kind of intellectual development, historical knowledge, and ethical character was required to wrest these achievements from out of the bloody iron fingers of the tyrants who prey on the masses of every era.
The participatory America we were taught to believe in has died, and this country is now ruled by the elite through private invitation-only clubs like the Council on Foreign Relations (notice that all presidents, Demican or Republocrat, have been CFR members for the past few decades), the Trilateral Commission (founded by David Rockefeller, and Zbigniew Brzinski, Obama’s NSC mentor), etc. They’re all big-money boys who play golf together, and posture like they’re opponents for the benefit of the ignorant public. Just about the only right we have left now is the right to vote, but that is an empty privilege, since elections are now rigged (see Jack Palast’s expose of the rigging of the past three elections).
No, you go ahead and hope and try to change the tide, but it is time to run for higher ground, away from the tsunami that is on its way. The American Empire is much like Rome in its final days, when the military continued on for a century or two after the actual fall of that Republic.
I do respect your courage and love of the ideals and documents this once-great country was founded on. Good luck.
@ Jim 4/16/12
That was a well crafted response Jim. I agree with each and every point you make. I wish Americans could find their way to “happier times” such as we experienced while living there in the 80s although now I know that our “happier times” were only due to the fact that we were disconnected from America as a whole (no phone, no TV) and we never sensed the darkness lying beneath the tin-shiny veneer of the country. We were engaged with building, surviving and enjoying our family and neighbours. Ignorance is indeed bliss.
On a lighter note, below is my take on American presidential elections and to be honest I have little reverence for the Canadian electoral process either (particularly after all the robocall skullduggery).
Every four years millions of American Peanuts line up in front of a giant football held in place by the top two Political Nuts vying to become POTUS, both promising all manner of tasty treats to the Peanuts in exchange for their kick of support. Every four years the Peanuts wind up and deliver their best kick but the Nuts pull away the football just before their feet can make contact. Every four years the Peanuts end up lying flat on their backs on the ground feeling deceived and deserted by the winning Political Nut and the loser too who skulks off into the background with a wink and a handshake to the winner. Every four years the winning Political Nut goes on to grind the poor American Peanuts into Peanut Butter which he then uses to nourish his own life and the lives of those who helped get him into the position of POTUS (i.e. Peanut Overseer of the United States).
Cynical about elections? You bet I am!
Jim,
Great post! Thank you for taking the time to write it.
1913 was the beginning of the end of America. The two-headed one-party system is completely controlled by Wall Street. The US economy is based on perpetual war (WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghan etc. etc.). The wars are funded by perpetual debt, courtesy of the FED banking cartel.
The FED is currently cannibalizing the dollar, which will eventually need to be replaced by a new currency (Ameros or SDR’s). This will pave the way for the creation of a new political entity (perhaps a North American Union).
The dollar and America as we once knew it, is toast in the making.
My allegiance is to the principles upon which America was founded, not the corrupt and tyrannical empire it has since become.
Most Homelanders are blind to this. Like mushrooms, they are kept in the dark and fed only horse $@*& by the main stream media.
I didn’t leave my country. My country left me.
Expatriation is only a formality.
Pingback: Remaining a dual citizen (1) : passport renewal | The Isaac Brock Society
Beautifully written. But there is a flaw in your logic. You can still fight for the values of freedom and liberty even when you’re not an American. One shouldn’t stay in an abusive relationship just because it was founded on love.
To be honest, I only see one (advantageous) reason not to renounce right now.
I intend to pursue graduate studies soon (in Europe) with an institution of higher education that qualifies for US federal government-subsidized student loans.
Where else can I get loans (possibly in the six figures) where interest is subsidized while studying, where the US dollar will most likely debase (versus the Swiss Franc), where I can lock into a fixed low interest rate and have a payment schedule over 20 years?
After graduating and relinquishing US citizenship, the entire principal of the loan can be deducted from gross assets when calculating Swiss wealth taxes and the annual interest payments can be deducted when calculating Swiss income tax regardless of income bracket (impossible to do in the US).
And by the time I graduate, my little red book with a white cross should arrive in the mail. Perfect timing 🙂
@foxyladyhawk, erm, I have some issues with your post, I’m afraid, but mainly the one that no one else has addressed: But America is the only place – the only place – where the key question of the role that the government should play in men’s lives is openly, freely and peacefully debated, for the whole world to observe.
How is the US system more open, free or peaceful than the UK, for example, or France? America is absolutely NOT the only place where governments are free, open, exposed to scrutiny and as fair as any democracy can be. In fact, I would argue that the concept of America as a “free” country is utter hogwash. My Canadian mother used to tell me that, but it wasn’t until I left the US in 1986, and moved to a truly free country, that I learned what she meant and what a despicable lie it is.
I think it’s wonderful that you still love America that much. I wish I did.
But the truth is, I hate bullies in all their forms, and that’s what America has become.
@foxladyhawk, Jetlag is right, your claim that “But America is the only place – the only place – where the key question of the role that the government should play in men’s lives is openly, freely and peacefully debated, for the whole world to observe.” is utter hogwash. Unless you maybe mean “debated in a language you happen to understand”.
In my experience (since the mid-1970s), German debates on such topics (and others) have been a great deal more open and free than those in America. And more thoughtful. But you would need to understand the language of the debate…
@Sally
@Jetlag
@FoxyLadyhawk
The US has not any constitutional change or renewal in 100 years. Other countries have. For example in Canada the whole debate over the Charter of Rights was precisely about the role that government should play in people’s lives. And yes it was very much debated!
The US is now very hostile to both freedom and democracy. On the latter point. visit independentvoting.org
Jetlag, I don’t disagree with anything you said. Because what I said was that the *discussion* of the role of government was free and open. Regardless of when or whether other countries discuss the role of government, because I am aware that they do, it is an ongoing discussion in the US precisely because it was the foundation concept at the founding of the country. The US was founded on an idea, and that idea was that while government was necessary, it should be strictly limited. The entire Constitution is a document that defines very narrowly the limits to the power of the federal government, and it explicitly states that all other powers belong to the people or to local governments. Since every government tries to expand its power, it is vital, for a country that was designed for a limited government, that the discussion of the limits of government be ongoing and continually relevant.
The point I wanted to make, perhaps not as well as I could have, is that this discussion is ongoing in the US, whereas in other countries it is not central to the political conversation. In 40 – plus years in Canada, I have never once heard a Canadian discuss the value of a limited government. It isn’t an important issue for Canadians, perhaps because most Canadians see the government as a partner in a civil society, not a danger that needs to be reined in.
vote for someone who states how many laws he will repeal, rather than how many laws he (she) will make.
Mark Twain, did you ever read Robert Heinlein’s book “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress”? He suggested a third house of Congress whose job was exactly that – repealing laws. It would be unwieldy to have yet another house that had to approve everything, but at least a major Senate or House committee that repealed laws that violated the Constitution would be a very good idea.
Pingback: The Isaac Brock Society
Pathetic exceptionalist tripe. Not unexpected.
Everything about DUHmerica is a lie. Most especially your founding documents.
As to DUHmerica being the ONLY place where the form of government is debated is simply untrue and disqualifies anything else in your diatribe.
Thankfully DUHmerica is about to turn the northern hemisphere into a smoldering nuclear ash in the very near future and we won’t have to suffer its nonsense much longer.