No, our Constitution is not perfect. That is why there was a means put into place to improve it.
I view it slightly differently .....
there was a means put in place to change it .... whether any change results in improvement is, of course, by no means assured ....
That is what "Amendments" are for. It is very difficult to amend the Constitution and for very good reason. It must be hard to do or that route would be used for every silly reason that could be thought of.
Indeed ....
Every bill passed and every amendment considered should be for the purpose of enhancing and improving personal freedom. It should also be looking to decrease the heave hand of government.
Ideally, yes, that should be the case ..... however the further a people are, in terms of their own personal experience, from actually having suffered under the yoke of tyranny, the less inclined in the above direction they will be.
In fact, the reverse is actually true:
people who have not so suffered, will actually be inclined to impose that tyranny, as a consequence of believing in the necessity of controlling the behavior of their fellows ....
And thus "authoritarians" are born ....
I do think, that if we every chance to meet, that you would find that we have far more in common that we do opposed.
I have absolutely no doubt that that would be the case ....
I do believe that we both want to restore our freedoms so that we can live as we were intended too. Our only differences are in where we emphasize our blame.
I think that is one area where we each might see things from a slightly different perspective .....
However, I also think that there might be some differences in terms of
the methods we each might be inclined to use to remedy the situation
And FWIW, I'm far less interested in
assigning blame (which is, inherently,
a denial of one's own personal responsibility), than I am in
understanding causes ....