2/ Shall we remove the Freedom of Information Act first? Hey, suddenly our government is 0.2 % smaller, because we're not paying unelected bureaucrats to open and respond to letters!
-
Show this thread
-
3/ Shall we remove public defenders next? We can cut the tax rate a tiny bit!
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likesShow this thread -
4/ We could get rid of parole boards, perhaps. Let every prisoner serve out the full term. That'd make government smaller, right?
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likesShow this thread -
5/ And then we've got pesky laws that stop teachers and police from campaigning for candidates from office. More laws that we can strike down! Smaller government, yeah!
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
6/ Or, perhaps, we have built up a terrible edifice where beam leans against beam, somewhat counter balancing each other, even as they make something grotesque and evil. ...and the ORDER in which we remove the components matter.
2 replies 2 retweets 12 likesShow this thread -
7/ Public defenders should be among the last to go (as you yourself agree, I think,
@LucyStag ). But controlling the borders is also way down on the list of things to chop.4 replies 1 retweet 10 likesShow this thread -
The constitution only specifically outlines a few things that are the responsibility of the federal government, but surely “guard the shores” is one of them.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @BevevinoJohn @MorlockP
It also suggested that the Post Office and fiat currency were awesome, is the constitution still your best friend?
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @LucyStag @BevevinoJohn
USPS and fiat currency are non ideal (I prefer an ancap marketplace), but they're hardly the kill shot for "hey, the constitution - as written - is a decent miniarchist document"
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MorlockP @BevevinoJohn
No, but think about what the Post Office has been used for. It sounds benign, but beyond booting Spooner out of the way, it was a lovely in-road for censorship and surveillance. What might border control be?
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes
ok, this leads into another really big complicated discussion of "the const is pretty small, and yet it had vulnerabilities that allowed statists to exploit it into a big gov; how do we architect against that for next time?"
-
-
Replying to @MorlockP @BevevinoJohn
Not small enough. Even if it has stayed the size it claimed to be. I still want to use that sexy Ninth Amendment, though. Why are we all pretending it's not there again?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @LucyStag @BevevinoJohn
agreed there; I read the Constitution in college, read the 9th and 10th, and "woke up". HOLY CRAP; 95% of what the USG does is illegitimate...by its own rules!!!
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - Show replies
New conversation -
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
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.