Feddit1876 and 1878 were based too
submitted by
PugJesushttps://media.piefed.social/posts/Na/tf/NatfFiZBqZWx8ZT.webp
https://media.piefed.social/posts/Na/tf/NatfFiZBqZWx8ZT.webp
1876: “No support to any religion and no clergy in government”
1894: “PRAISE JEEEEEEEZUS”
There are two Americans inside of us
The jesus amendment has been proposed over and over, with similar ones dropped in 1864, 1874, 1896, 1910 and 1954.
They do not give up.
Well they basically got it, even if it’s not written down. The current administration is doing its damnedest to fulfill the requirements outlined for the apocalypse.
–Vermont Constitution, Article 3
The one after it doesn’t seem awful, either. May need some automatic inflation adjustments, though.
At this point, I’d be fine with any number between $10M and $1B today, and then like you said lock it to inflation. And tax all annual income above some set amount at 100%. Don’t like it? Reinvest more money into your company, pay your employees more, or donate more instead of taking such a ludicrous salary. Abolish yachts.
What actually happens is the rich move to Dubai or similar. We tried a wealth tax in Norway and all the useless real estate “entrepreneurs” moved to Switzerland. To be fair I haven’t really heard of anyone who’s actually not easily replaceable moving, but this limit is way more radical than a wealth tax.
Good, fuck em. Society doesn’t need wealthy people.
‘A nation that makes a great distinction between its scholars and its warriors will have its laws made by cowards and its wars fought by fools.’ - Thucydides circa a while a go.
I like the one below too “an attempt to linit personal wealth to 1 million”
“National Public Vote”
(predates women’s suffrage)
It’s possible a law like that could have slowed down feminism and the right for women to vote by quite a number of years …decades even. Maybe forever.
Because women moved into the work places due to men going to war. And in many ways feminism has its roots in those eras.
Not excusing war. I’m considering alternative effects. Case in point. Women didn’t get the right to vote in Switzerland until 1979.
Yeah, that right. 1979!
Executive counsel of 3 to replace the president.
Yes
One person should not be in charge.
I don’t think that’s ever worked out for humanity.
The Executive isn’t supposed to have as much power as it currently is using. The other branches that have the power to stop it don’t care though. Haven’t for years really.
In part that power grab is a product of single power hungry people changing laws and pushing for that increase in power. It’s possible a group of 3 might do the same. But it’s maybe not.
If we had a 3 party system and made it so someone from each party was elected that would force more cooperation.
Or… Could also breakdown differences between parties over time. To where ultimately one party controls the other two.
Kinda of like how the democratic party in the U.S is basically Republican now with a handful of exceptions.
I’ve not studied political history so I’m just guessing on how things could play out.
I mean having 90-year olds on the battlefield might get in the way a bit. But I like the idea behind it.
War efforts require all sorts of work. Not just combat. Maybe the 90yr old can do dishes or patch uniforms.
Regardless, it would be better than the rich sending the young to die.
“Oh, but this isn’t an act of war. It’s an excursion. You know? All of our military boys booked a cruise ship vacation to the Middle East, and one of the excursions listed in the pamphlet was, ‘Murder children and elderly Ayatollahs in Iran to distract the American public from the Trump-Epstein files.’”
Unfunny jokes aside, there are many amendments I would like to pass before that. And I’m an older man anyways, so I probably wouldn’t be seeing any danger if I voted for a war.
I’d pass an Amendment that guarantees citizens right to receive the best attempt at truthful statements from the government and political candidates, where immediate dismissal is the minimum consequence for any intentional lie in a public statement from a government worker, and for any other workers who conspired to lie to the public.
I think that Americans cannot be expected to vote correctly if they are lied to by their government.
I’d pass an Amendment that standardizes how voting districts are drawn, and requires them to be drawn for the most fair representation among known voting blocks.
I’d pass an Amendment that requires the voting method used to try to maximize certain aspects like Condorcet voting, such as ability to recount, removing spoiler candidates, and minimizing voter dissatisfaction.
I’d pass an Amendment that says campaigns cannot be funded by private donations, including volunteering time. Campaigns are either run on a flat fee, or they can incorporate things like vouchers that are provided to registered voters.
We still haven’t passed that equality Amendment for women’s rights.
For less fleshed out ones, I’d love amendments that guarantee nutrition and education for children, and clean water and free medical care for every American.
“United states of the Earth”? What was the logic behind that?
Manifest Destiny Baby 🦅 👊 🍆
1893: the US air force guess back in time to pull the ultimate prank on it’s older siblings
God I hope someone invents time travel and fixes this.
I was all nods and shrugs until things took a hard turn in that list.
Ikr, i looked what’s inside the red box, looked at the first two and almost came to a conclusion about the whole text until my eyes went to the ones above the red box, yikes
US citizens need ‘a right to be left alone.’
Ok! Hey buddy, so rich fascists have been in control of the US for almost 200 years now, so the idea that this could ever pass, even during the time it was proposed, is laughable and completely fucking infantile! You are a complete and utter fool if you think otherwise! 😊
Hope that helps!