A.J. Jacobs Spent a Year Living “Constitutionally.” What Did He Learn?

Подписаться 120 тыс.

Просмотров 2,3 тыс.

50% 1

To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/Skeptic/ . You’ll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription.
The Michael Shermer Show # 443
In the wake of several controversial rulings by the Supreme Court and the on-going debate about how the Constitution should be interpreted, Jacobs tried to get inside the minds of the Founding Fathers by living as closely as possible to the original meaning of the Constitution.
He asserted his right to free speech by writing his opinions on parchment with a quill and handing them out to strangers in Times Square. Because women were not allowed to sign contracts-he attempted to take over his wife’s day job, which involves a lot of contract negotiations. He also delivered a handwritten petition to Congress and applied for a Letter of Marque to become a legal pirate for the government.
He also dived deep into originalism and living constitutionalism, the two rival ways of interpreting the document.
A.J. Jacobs is a journalist, lecturer, and human guinea pig whose books include Drop Dead Healthy, The Year of Living Biblically, and The Puzzler. His new book is The Year of Living Constitutionally: One Man’s Humble Quest to Follow the Constitution’s Original Meaning.
SPONSOR
This video was sponsored by Brilliant.
#michaelshermer
#skeptic
Listen to The Michael Shermer Show or subscribe directly on RU-vid, Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, and Google Podcasts.
www.skeptic.com/michael-sherm...

Наука

Опубликовано:

23 июл 2024

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 20

@skepticmagazine 27 дней назад

To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/Skeptic/ . You’ll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription.

@jeffersonianideal 27 дней назад

The Constitution may not be perfect, but it’s better than what we have now.

@farinshore8900 24 дня назад

We don't have news now, we have opinion.

@jeffersonianideal 26 дней назад

"... in questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the constitution ...." -Thomas Jefferson

@sulljoh1 27 дней назад

"Why is it that I'm the only person I've ever met that is correct on every single issue?" 🤣

@KentMcManigal 27 дней назад

He missed the entire point of the Bill of Rights. It's not about what people are allowed to do, but about what government is forbidden to do. As in, it's not about freedom of speech/the press through handing out handbills written with a quill-- the technology is irrelevant since the whole point was that government is forbidden to meddle in the things placed out of reach of the government by the Constitution. If you don't understand the point, you'll come to the wrong conclusions every time. (I am not a constitutionalist, believing instead that documents don't create or protect rights, and that the "right" to govern others can't exist or be created.)

@sulljoh1 26 дней назад

This sounds right - but I am constantly annoyed by people who say "private platforms banning speech doesn't violate the 1st amendment!" Yes, and banning all black people from your private home doesn't violate the civil rights act. But it DOES show that you failed to understand the ethical justification.

@KentMcManigal 26 дней назад

@@sulljoh1 And when platforms censor at the direction of government, as is usually the case, it absolutely does violate the First Amendment. This may be the case with this platform’s increasing crackdown on gun channels. Either way, it shows that those who run the platform are vile bigots. Even in the case of so-called “hate speech”, I’d rather know who is reprehensible by letting them speak their minds than prevent anyone being offended by what they say so that no one knows who the monsters among us are. Freedom of speech is non-negotiable.

@j.hueston4370 14 дней назад

@@sulljoh1 I agree with Kent that the Bill of Rights restricts the GOVERNMENT not the general population. Taking that view, then speech could be restricted on a private platform by the owner of the platform.

@sulljoh1 14 дней назад

@@j.hueston4370 It could. That isn't illegal. Just like banning all black people from your private home doesn't violate the civil rights act.

@Iamjamessmith1 27 дней назад

The good old days were good because they are gone... For now.

@gavinsmith9564 27 дней назад

Other than Police at Airports etc, I've never seen a gun in the UK.

@sulljoh1 26 дней назад

Sounds nice. The states literally has more guns than people and no realistic way to change that

@enotdetcelfer 27 дней назад

The point about having a monthly column vs daily pieces is something I'm turning over in my head right now too... Rick Beato just put out a video talking about how it's so easy to crank out music now, and the worth of working for music, both in the making and the aquisition and enjoyment. A monthly column not only gives me, the reader, a chance to digest like you said, to walk the world with it and integrate realizations and reflections, but it also is a product of you evaluating what's worth writing. You, with your experiences and insights notice what keeps coming up for you as you think about perhaps unrelated things in the world and events over the course of the month, and we get the benefit of your particular distillation. How to keep this aspect while everything speeds up with AI and all the societal changes that are challenging us on the horizon is something I'm mullling intently recently and this conversation was very interesting to many ends.

@DeconvertedMan 27 дней назад

Longer info is required to explain complex concepts, broadly speaking. :)

@ajkbox 14 дней назад

Combining the freedom of speech with freedom of religion might have been logical at the time as people were fleeing from England and Europe to avoid the state churches of their countries. Maybe that was the bulk of free speech at the time.

@Mr.PhatsVarietyVibesShow 27 дней назад

good topic

@TheWeirdSide1 21 день назад

Can I make a suggestion? If the guest was given a chance to speak right away before you summarize their bio it would be a little less awkward I think. I can see the guest is put in awkward 'silent mode', as clearly seen here. I see this on all you uploads. Even if they can just say "hello or hi"...something, before they then sit there silently for bio. I could be wrong