Hacker News Reader

Comment by Pet_Ant | Hacker News Reader

All this rigor for a country without an actual formalised constitution. I mean, maybe the government should work on that first and make sure it has a right to work there first?

> Unlike in most countries, no official attempt has been made to codify ... thus it is known as an uncodified constitution.

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

View on HN

Based on recent events, I wouldn't suggest a constitution makes much of a difference to an adversarial government.

This. The illusion that you could fend off tyranny with a piece of paper was always a bit ridiculous, and it shows.

Arguably it's purpose is to define where government responsibility ends and tyranny begins. Very useful if the population it applies to cares about it being violated

The Magna Carta was meant to formalise that spec 800 years ago.

I suspect there is a hysteresis loop - it has to get really bad before the population changes phase.

their goal is to expand the orwellian spying panopticon, not to codify people's rights.

How's that piece of paper working out for you guys right now?

I'm sorry but how is this relevant? Or did you just recently learn this and thought it's "interesting" to share?

They want to have rigorous well-indexed system for the people in a country, when the system of the country isn't rigorous.

When your constitution is ad hoc, it seems only fair that everything else is. Start with the foundation before formalising everything else.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com