Why didn't I think of that? I'll do it tomorrow. But how will this stay the rule if the majority of the population don't want it to be? Governments change as populations do. They can get more or less protective of human rights and they can overthrow former agreements.https://twitter.com/jimm_eh/status/991438974169243648 …
But the ways in which it is constrained changes with the culture. England used to be constrained by Catholicism, then Protestantism as well as various monarchs, then it was a Republic briefly, then it was a democracy with a token monarchy. The zeitgeist changes all the time.
-
-
The zeitgeist may change, sure, but the basic facts don’t. Individuals have rights, that are morally prior to government power, including the vote. A government held to this is “constrained”. (Others usually say “limited”, but that can get into the weeds about size.)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I don’t think we’re on the same page re: constraint. For one thing, religions did not constrain government, it gave them *license* (hence the need to separate the two). From your list it looks like you’re thinking of forms of government, anyhow.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.