Which Part Of The US Should Be Granted Statehood?

Post Reply New Topic

Turnout has been the main issue with most of the PR referendums from what I've heard. A big part of this is that the leaders of the status quo camp usually tell their supporters to not take part in the referendums. Turnout probably isn't helped either since they're usually non-binding. Or people feel like statehood or independence wouldn't be solutions to the problems PR faces.

I just wanted to say a couple of things. I believe I stated previously that I believed the time has come to consider replacing the constitution, IOW calling a Constitutional Convention. I don't understand why anyone would assume this would lead to some sort of Bolshevik society. My preference would be for some sort of confederation like Switzerland, but that is probably a minority opinion.

However, anybody who worships the constitution should bear in mind that the US has become, in the minds of many world wide, the least democratic and least admired country among the "western democracies" and this should serve as a warning that something is wrong. Clearly our constitution is no longer working and something has to change.

So you think it is a flawed constitution leading to a troubled populace. I think it is the other way around.

Does it have to be one or the other, can't it be both? The flawed constitution reflects a flawed populace, but it also serves to bind them to the mistakes of their ancestors leading to additional problems that might otherwise be more easily resolved.

I mostly agree. I'm sorry if it came off the other way, I was just trying to "talk more conservative" (?) if that makes sense. (Phrasing and forming an argument based on what they already might believe)
I find it very hard to believe that it would be possible to get all the states to agree to attend a new constitutional convention, let alone ratifying a new one. There would need to be some *serious* circumstances for everybody to get on board with questioning the current constitution like they did with the Articles of Confederation. There would need to be both de jure and de facto will to do that and I don't see that happening any time soon.
The most likely way we would get a new constitution without each state being on board would probably involve bloodshed, secession of however many states, or both. Bc it would need to be group A of states imposing their will on group B of states.
It pains me to say that it's easier to get 3/4 states on board with amendments than 4/4 states on board with an entirely new constitution.