The Constitution was a psyop to introduce authoritarianism. Just like today, its rationale depended on psyops: whiskey rebellion, shayes rebellion.
The Bill of Rights got the anti-federalists to play along with slipping the Constitution onto the people. Within 10 years of introducing it, future amendments stopped focusing on improving the lot of the people, and instead focused on empowerment of the central government.
Nah...
Which founding father said "We've given you a republic now lets see if you can keep it"?
Which of the first 10 amendments centralized government control? Anyway you made my point that no matter what happened to the USA historically, the constitution was no psyop from the beginning lolol.
The first 10 are the Bill of Rights, you didn't even understand what I said
I certainly understood. Which of them centralized governmental control? 1st? 2nd? Which?
Pretty sure they guaranteed God given freedoms and had nothing to do with any psyop.
The anti-federalists, the ones who were against the Constitution, like Patrick Henry, demanded the Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments) before they would sign on. So the authoritarian feds appeased them to get their centralized power psyop through. Subsequent amendments (beyond the first 10 which you still failed to understand) are pretty much all focused on consolidating power, exactly as the anti-federalists warned.
https://i.nostr.build/u9b9N0SvCS5TdWsx.jpg
Stop telling me what I don't understand.
I'm familiar with all of that and simply called you out on calling the Constitution a "psy-op" which is patently ridiculous. Of course there were different factions but the original idea was never to impinge on the rights of man but to recognize and honor them.
Oddbean new post about login | logout 