TIL: That Israel does not have a Constitution.

submitted by Tom_Bombadil from en.wikipedia.org

all 20 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

unwritten constitution is like unwritten doctrine. It'd be controversial for regular goys to see it so they keep it hidden. It exists but with have stuff in it like the hebrew bible has saying it's ok to lie to and kill non jews

[–]Tom_Bombadil[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

An unwritten constitution means that people who live within Israel's borders have no guarantee of any fundamental rights.

The laws can easily be changed by the lawmakers, when it suits them..

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

truth is even with a written constitution it could get ignored all the time anyway

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

An unwritten constitution means that people who live within Israel's borders have no guarantee of any fundamental rights.

Nobody has this guarantee, with or without a constitution. Those of you in the US should know that your constitution isn't what's keeping you your rights.

[–]Tom_Bombadil[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

i agree, and it is a problem. The US was founded in-part to preserve the institution of slavery.

However, a constitution is more than a set of laws.

A constitution is formalization of a set of societal/cultural principles and ideals that the country should strive to achieve.

There will always be people who are interested in their own personal power.

The question that I have is:
How can these people be objectively criticized about specific injustices if a documented set of principles does not exist?

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

A constitution is formalization of a set of societal/cultural principles and ideals that the country should strive to achieve.

Bah. US culture has changed so much that parts of the constitution aren't even being taken in context any more. Take the fifth amendment, for example. It applies until you're read the Miranda, and then anything you say or do is treated as deliberate and willing self-incrimination, even when you're being beaten down psychologically – completely opposite to the intention of those who wrote the constitution.

That's because the ideals in the US constitution were the ideals of a group who, while having the right idea, were pretty out of touch; virtually nobody was paying attention to the Fifth Amendment until Miranda.

So realistically, you're only going to be able to keep the principles written in your constitution if your country's culture supports them. And if it does, what's the point in writing those principles down? If they're written down, people'll start following the letter and not the spirit.

The principle behind English Common Law is to write down the laws people are already following. That principle keeps you from getting all dictatorial, but only if the culture allows it (by enforcing it). (I'm concerned that that's becoming less of the case, but that's off-topic.) That's why Britain doesn't really have a constitution; the Magna Carta is the closest thing, but that's completely moot until the government gets so corrupt that the monarch throws it away and starts again with a new government.

[–]Tom_Bombadil[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

You're missing the point.

A constitution is formalization of a set of societal/cultural principles and ideals that the country should strive to achieve.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

It didn't work for the USSR. Idealism only gets you so far; if you've got a piece of paper saying "we should try to do this" it doesn't mean you're ever going to try to do it.

[–]Tom_Bombadil[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

K

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I also acknowledge that I have read this comment, but don't really want to reply to it. (I'll assume that's what you usually mean by "K", since it makes the most sense.)

[–]hennaojisan 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

They just make it up as they go along.

[–]Tom_Bombadil[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

The have laws, but no overarching set of legal principles. Laws can be changed fairly easily.

The only nation on Earth that claims to have a "right to exist", has no Constitution.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Lots of places don't have a constitution. It's not that surprising to people outside the US.

[–]Tom_Bombadil[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

That's interesting.

What other country does not have a Constitution?

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Much of Europe, for instance. According to this, it's only the UK. But I don't believe it.

According to this page, it's NZ, Saudi Arabia and Canada also.

[–]Tom_Bombadil[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

That's interesting.

It's also interesting that you put some time into investigating other countries questionable lack of a written constitution.

That's a surprising way to spend your time.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's a surprising way to spend your time.

Sums up 90% of people here. But I only spent around 7 minutes looking. And it looks like most of Europe has a constitution nowadays.

The surprising thing is that I did a bunch of research into US law (the US's unlack of a constitution, I suppose), despite not living in the US.

[–]useless_aether 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

til. and i heard that the united nations charter is the verbatim copy of the constitution of the soviet union.

[–]Tom_Bombadil[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Is that a fact?

Didn't the Rockefellers organize the UN?

[–]useless_aether 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

i had no idea, so i just put them into two tabs to compare. i dont think so, but i didnt read all of it.

before the un there was the switzerland based league of nations.

but the rockefellers also created the soviet union, with their standard oil, along with ford and other banking players..

lenins sealed money train departed from nazi-templar switzerland, where the bis, the global central bank is. antony sutton did a good research on how wall st created both hitler and the soviets..