IG’s solution to new constitutions being passed every time a new Party takes office is… to pass a new constitution now he’s in.

Tbf, that's actually a good point.

IG wants to pass a new constitution that purports to bind successor governments, while at the same time blasting the old constitution that purported to bind successor governments as “tyrannical.”

I don’t recall him raising any fuss at the time it was passed, however.

I never said I wanted to outright ban constitutions and that’s because I don’t want to do that. my point was that I don’t like how we always change the entire system of government every time we have an election. I was proposing we have a constitution that’s good enough to last, not like OP’s constitution that outright bans all others. And yet that’s the one you’re defending. All because you got mad at me marking an image NSFW no doubt.

And I never raised a fuss because I didn’t see that part jus t like everyone else.

I saw that provision at the time I voted to ratify it as a Senator. I didn’t see much of a problem with it. That’s what Constitutions are! A code of fundamental laws that transcends governments and elections. Or purports to.

That said, throughout history countries have undergone political revolutions that resulted in major constitutional rewrites or even brand new constitutions. Lincoln didn’t think much of the old U.S. Constitution that allowed blacks to be enslaved, so he amassed the votes and changed it through a series of significant Amendments.

A Constitution can declare itself the undying law of the land, but who decides whether to follow it? It’s just words on a page!

If you don’t like the CSP Constitution for whatever reason and have the votes to toss it out, then you can, regardless of what it says. In my opinion.

And then the next government can toss yours out if they don’t like it. :)

At the end of the day it’s Scar who decides. That’s the reality of this stream.

…But he won’t get away with making a new tyrannical constitution because everyone’s working on this one.
As for not making a fuss, half of the people didn’t read the constitution properly, and skimmed it (because they trusted the government, like me, and presumably a good chunk of the stream), or they saw and didn’t care.
And putting the most controversial article in the middle of the document, where OP knew wouldn’t look too closely, is just scummy.

sloth has picked his side and he decided I was worse for wanting a constitution made by the people that’s well-written enough to last than OP and Surly who legit tried to ban all constitutions in a blatant power grab.

My defence: firstly I never said I wanted to outright ban constitutions and that’s because I don’t want to do that. Secondly my point was that I don’t like how we always change the entire system of government every time we have Ann election. I was proposing we have a constitution that’s good enough to last, not like OP’s constitution that outright bans all others.

My defence: firstly I never said I wanted to outright ban constitutions and that’s because I don’t want to do that. Secondly are you seriously siding with OP and Surly here? Thirdly my point was that I don’t like how we always change the entire system of government every time we have Ann election. I was proposing we have a constitution that’s good enough to last, not like OP’s constitution that outright bans all others. Nice try.

However, he explained his would be the permanent one. So it makes sense

Re-read my comment :)

ok it was in case you didn’t read it

Alright

I like the way this is starting out.