tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post5516647882948153513..comments2024-02-29T03:34:23.190-05:00Comments on Who Were the Sea Peoples?: Mr. Huff, I Wish to Complain about Some Stuffgcallahhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10065877215969589482noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-82976384005799454572012-07-31T16:15:08.624-04:002012-07-31T16:15:08.624-04:00My reply.<a href="http://gene-callahan.blogspot.com/2012/07/an-interesting-thought-from-ps-huff.html" rel="nofollow">My reply</a>.gcallahhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10065877215969589482noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7225373.post-84120338425155136262012-07-30T14:49:23.209-04:002012-07-30T14:49:23.209-04:00Sorry about that. I just changed the name servers ...Sorry about that. I just changed the name servers last night, so the site is currently in "limbo" between the old (Blogger) site and the new (Wordpress) site. Right now, some people (like me) are seeing the new site, while others (like you) are seeing the old. (That's why you weren't able to comment: I turned off comments on the Blogger end, as I didn't want someone to take the effort of posting a comment only to have it vanish over night. Comments are definitely turned on at the Wordpress site—as the SPAM bots have already figured out!)<br /><br />As for substantive matters: I didn't mean to suggest that you hadn't covered the differences in amendment procedures. As you point out, constitutions that are hard to amend can be seen as more rationalist than those that are easy to amend. But what I'm suggesting is that it's a mistake to think that all written constitutions are <i>necessarily</i> rationalist, while unwritten constitutions are not. That depends on what the constitution sets out to do. Does it attempt to law down, in great detail, the principles of government; or does it simply set up some basic institutions, while allowing for amendment through reasonable means?<br /><br />In the Machiavelli section, you write "the republicans of the Italian Renaissance could not rely on a native tradition of republicanism as the Romans had done—thus, they sought answers to their difficulties in more abstract political theories." But I don't think it's fair to say that every attempt to establish a new government is rationalist. Suppose a longstanding dictatorial government is toppled by a foreign power. What do you do? Go back to traditions that hardly anyone remembers?PHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12011728672116977010noreply@blogger.com