It's official: the Declaration of Independence is lib-cuck

>>133221910
Exactly. The English were right. This is like babies first red pill, come on man.

http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.ca/2009/01/gentle-introduction-to-unqualified_15.html

>>133221910
congrats on taking the bitterest pill of them all: the anglo pill

>>133221910
You joke, but you're actually correct. The USA is a mongrelized, cultureless mess of a "nation" filled with shitskins and internal strife.

File: verysadman.jpg (60KB, 334x250px)

60KB, 334x250px

>>133221910
Congratulations. You've reached the point of true enlightenment. The American system was designed to govern 200,000 Anglos, not 350,000,000 mongrels. The Founding Fathers should be considered immense failures, not successful nation builders. Their doctrine failed entirely.

I imagine OP thought he was being really clever and making a point that would trigger /pol/ when he created this thread. I can only assume they're some left-wing dipshit from a board like /mu/ or possibly Tumblr or R*eddit itself, with only the vaguest of ideas of what the politics of this board are like.

>>133221910
Newfag caliber b8. Lurk moar

>>133222328
You shitskin, bro ?

File: 1499623250070.gif (249KB, 500x375px)

249KB, 500x375px

>>133221910
The SJW version would have read, "All men should be equal." "And some men are more equal than others."
You're an idiot OP.

>>133222607
I haven't seen a shitskin in 2017 yet.

File: IMG_3845.png (2MB, 750x1334px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 750x1334px

>>133222328
Ah yes and your unwritten 'constitution' has given you laws which lock you up for saying nasty words online, knife bins, tv detector vans, and 40 year old 'child' rapefugees. But tell me more about how our constitution is flawed

ITT: Salty Cucks jealous of US success

File: 20170709_170416.jpg (2MB, 3264x1836px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x1836px

>>133221910
Bitch please I smell a bunch of faggot haters about, example "I hate America & there cuco Constitution with its silly free speech & right to beat arms". I bet it's so much better in Canada or Europe where mudslimes have installed sharia law & have mudslime patrols, I mean who would need to own GUN over there? Here is a picture of freedom bitches.

>>133222716
You realize your Constitution is a copy of the British Bill of Rights 1689? We don't have an "unwritten Constitution", we have thousands of written bits of legislation which dictate our Constitution.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689#Provisions_of_the_Act

Sound familiar? The Founding Fathers were rip off merchants.

File: 1499598476548.jpg (621KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

621KB, 1200x800px

>>133222961
>Rip-off
>Vastly more successful than the original

>>133222935
Mate, you're 52% white, with an ex two term negro president, a conquered executive branch, senate, supreme court, and a 2-party system where neither are concerned about the negrofication of your country.

But yes, honestly, 100% my props on gun ownership. You won't use them until the second term of your 5th nigger president but America truly is unique in how you retained the right to bear arms though.

That doesn't make up for the rest of your broken system.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790

>>133221910
Bait, but I'll bite

All men are CREATED equal, not the guarantee of being equal. It's the PERSUIT of happiness, not the guarantee of happiness.

In a truly Libertarian society there'd be no white genocide because welfare nigs and spics wouldn't be able to afford 5+ kids because of no gibs.

File: 1499089537043.jpg (2MB, 2143x1421px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2143x1421px

>>133221910

what most people do not get is that the legal definition of a "man" back then covered only the colonists themselves - men that could own land legally, men that could vote etc. Slaves were under a totally different classification, as they were not seen as the people that formed the backbone of the society, but rather as a tool used by the white colonists.

Nonetheless, if you take the entire Declaration of Independence verbatim, you'd see that the Founding Fathers actually had the best in mind for the Anglo-Saxon colonists ONLY. This guy gets it also >>133222328

tl;dr granting niggers and spics the same rights as the rest of the Anglo-Saxon 'murica was the biggest mistake

>>133222716
Clearly both societies are flawed m8. As soon as the West started treating shitskins like people and importing them like exotic beasts, shit started going downhill. Look at the absolute state of the USA ever since desegregation and note the trend as the population has become more "diverse". Social tensions have been rising, degeneracy has become more commonplace, violence has been normalized, and so on. Whites are at the brink of becoming a minority there and it's only going to get worse. I don't know what you can do to stop it, but I hope you manage to pull something off, somehow.

And in Europe, we have migrants causing violent crime epidemics never before seen in the modern era, women no longer feel safe to walk the streets at night, terrorist attacks from the Religion of Peace feel like a weekly occurrence, it's all fucking crumbling down because we opened the gates and let the barbarians loose. Meanwhile, white liberal faggots make excuses for it all and then sleep at night feeling good about defending some brown cunt who will be utterly thankless for it.

Shit's fucked, my dude.

>>133222961
>we have thousands of written bits of legislation which dictate our Constitution.
None of which give you something as simple as freedom of speech. Enjoy being jailed for dropping bacon near a mosque.

>>133223328
The right to freedom of speech is enshrined in around 10 bits of legislation. The Bill of Rights 1689 and the Act of Settlement 1701 most famously.

Sort of like the whole part of America where it was meant to be a white only nation, but later legislation ruined that, the same happened in regards to le """freedom of speech""""

>>133221910
It really isn't they just delude themselves into thinking it was.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9hOqjjaRW5o&t=1s

File: IMG_3789.png (558KB, 503x653px) Image search: [Google]

558KB, 503x653px

>>133222961
a thousand loose leaf sheets scattered in different places doesn't equal a constituition. Your rights are not codified or enshrined in idenfifiable documents. That's why your 'bill of rights' is about as useful as tesco value toilet paper. Obviously the us legal system is based on Anglo common law notions, but to think we used your bill of rights for anything genuinely substantive is laughable. Your bill of rights talks about restrciting the crowns authority and rules about your joke of a legislature. Not really relevant to us. Notice how your bill of rights or constitution didn't give you proper freedom of speech. Wonderful document that one

>>133221910
>Americans are so enamoured of equality, that they would rather be equal in slavery, than unequal in freedom
>Alexis De Tocqueville, Democracy in America, 1830

File: lol.png (158KB, 498x280px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 498x280px

>>133223121
>PERSUIT

>>133223707
The Bill of Rights was anything other than "useless" since a) it isn't "the" Constitution b) it served its purposes entirely. It returned rights to Protestants which were otherwise taken away by King James before the Glorious Revolution and it governed Britain and its territories, not as the center fold for law, but in hand with English common law.

File: IMG_3831.jpg (96KB, 745x679px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 745x679px

>>133223203
I guess no one really thought how quickly niggers breed back then. All that cotton labor really backfired

>>133223707
>. Not really relevant to us.
Also, the Bill of Rights 1689 governed North America before and throughout the American Revolution so that states its relevancy to you. It directly precedes the Constitution, and was an obvious influence (along with the Magna Carta, Assize of Arms, etc).

> Your bill of rights talks about restrciting the crowns authority
Why is this a bad thing? Do you not know Britain was the first country in history to experiment with Republicanism since the Fall of Rome? Every theory on political divison of power between monarchs-parliaments come from Britain.

>>133223854
Wow the writers of your bill of rights were some future looking prescient fuckers, they clearly knew it would have relevance far into the future. You guys still banned from hunting foxes?

>>133224128
But it literally did lel. The British Empire probably would've have happened without the Bill of Rights 1689. That's 2 centuries of history wiped out of the annals. Can you explain that and how we make up for that?

>>133224265
>would've
wouldn't*
In regards to King James, and parliaments (obvious) role in the Empire.

>>133224265
Meh point taken

>>133223109
>MUH x% white meme
>MUH mulatto president
Remind me how many times you let a woman run your country.

>>133223109
>and a 2-party system
You mean basically what you have now with Tories and Labour
>Implying any of the other parties are at all relevant

>>133223440

Enjoy being hauled in for mean tweets.

>>133223984

Articles of Confederation directly preceded the Constitution. Learn your history. Their failure was what convinced the US that it needed a strong government after. Thomas Jefferson and the Anti-Federalists insisted on the Bill of Rights being added to the Constitution as the price of their support, and thank God that he did or we'd be up the same creek as you with the "I'm all for free speech, but..." crowd.