Comment by kenjackson

17 hours ago

It’s amazing that on HN this is not universally condemned. The big learning out of this administration is that the US people aren’t stewards of democracy. But rather fanatics of their “side”.

HN has a whole lot of people trying to make it really big financially, for a huge variety of reasons. One of the things that excludes someone from that group is an understanding that our culture is dominated by the idea that wealth is the first, biggest, best priority.

We collectively give the wealthy extra protection, status, and influence. Basically every definition or subcategory of power.

When you do this, it creates a disgusting race to the bottom from those trying to reach the top. We are seeing the ultimate result of that: a mafia kingdom. A feudal clown show.

You will see a weirdly large amount of people supporting that here because a large number of people have conditioned morality out of their ideology. Or reduced it to a very superficial level, completely subservient to the almighty dollar. "Greed is good", "the ECONOMY", "my peers do it so it's okay". And in and on and on.

In short, many would be doing the same thing in the same position and they can't see just how amoral that is. And how it reflects the utter rot that is our culture.

I'm familiar with at least one company where the execs are downright excited about the new way of doing business. No longer do you have to carefully study laws and regulations, you just have to make sure one guy likes you! It's a nice deal if you can get it, which is why I'm so aggressive about saying that the people who are getting it need to go to prison when constitutional governance is restored.

  • > No longer do you have to carefully study laws and regulations, you just have to make sure one guy likes you!

    American civic understanding has gone through the floor. People already think that corporate quid pro quo is the default, so for some, this is actually an improvement because it's more transparent now. It can't be that corporations achieve wins through research and coalition building because that would imply that people aren't not doing enough themselves. The irony has made lobbying stigmatized in grass-roots organizations [1], which only gives corporate lobbyists more power.

    [1] https://apnews.com/article/nonprofits-lobbying-less-survey-1...

    • Right. The founders of the country would be shaking their heads in disbelief; every day the administration hews closer to the tyranny the Federalist Papers were so on guard against.

Why? Tech has plenty of win at all costs people. Some of the most prominent people who openly don't believe in democracy are tech people.

I know it is a cliche at this point but there are clear parallels to what happened in Nazi Germany.

Many people don't know is that the Nazi party was voted democratically into the government. They didn't win the majority but got most votes. They were majority in the Reichstag (Congress). One of the selling point was that Weimar Republic had lost World War I and the reparations paid to the Allied powers was a slap in the face and the country has fallen (aka country was no longer great, people were laughing at them etc ). Hilter wasn't even elected, he was appointed by the Nazi Party.

The Nazi Party then went on a spree - twisting arms, illegal detention etc to get what they want. Lot of people were complicit in their rise. As Martin Niemöller wrote:

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out— Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

At this point there is no dearth of fools who think because they are above the "left" because their party is in power. If they continue to align or voraciously defend these intimidation tactics and tariffs etc they are going to be better off.

If there is a big learning to had here - History repeats itself. Mostly because people think they are better than people who came before them. People believe that the can get along with a person who cares nothing but for power. At this point, there is nothing which can be said or done to help them because they believe their enemies being better off is the win.

  • > They were majority in the Reichstag

    No, they weren't, they formed a coalition government with another far right party and still that was a minority coalition that was put into place by the (elected with a majority) President (who was not a Nazi) because there was no majority coalition formed.

    Even in the first (and only multiparty) election after the Hitler-led minority coalition was installed, (which was very much not a free and fair election) the Nazis themselves still didn't win a majority, though the Nazi/DVNP coalition did secure a majority.

    The Nazis did get an “elected” majority in the 1936 election, where only Nazi party members and Nazi-invited guests (one per seat) were on the ballot, in a single “approve/reject” slate in each constituency, but...

    > Hilter wasn't even elected he was appointed by the Nazi Party.

    This is true in the same sense that it is true that the PM of the UK is appointed by their party, not elected. Hitler was the leader of the Nazi Party, he and his coalition government were appointed by the President (who wasn't part of the Nazi Party)

Look man, dems have tried the whole "democracy is on the ballot" thing and lost two elections to trump. They have lost to him twice! Maybe instead of campaigning on how bad the other guy is (disclaimer: i fully agree that he is bad), they could actually do things that make people want to vote for them? I say this as someone who would really like to republicans lose forever after this, but who fears that the dems won't ever win again because they won't change.

  • It's August in a non-election year, nobody's campaigning right now.

    I agree with your fear, but one of the key problems Dems have faced in their messaging is a false perception that the modern Republican party believes in truth, democracy, or the rule of law. A lot of effort went into negotiating bipartisan immigration reform in 2024, because the negotiators falsely believed that Republicans wanted immigration to be reformed. It would have been a great reason to vote for them if it had worked! But once the negotiators announced a breakthrough, Trump issued new instructions that Republicans who want to stay in good standing must not support it and his appointed Speaker of the House must never let the bill come up for a vote, ensuring that it could never pass.

    So it's not enough to come up with a reason to make people want to vote for you. You have to come up with a reason that Trump can't tell plausible lies about, and that Trump's anti-democratic conduct can't defeat. That's a much harder problem.

    • But that's why they're losing. Republicans are in permanent campaign mode. Did Trump shut up after he left office in disgrace in 2021? No, he just kept acting like he was president and kept his coalition together.

      I agree with all your criticisms of Republicans. But Dems have major faults. they're bad communicators. They won't push symbolic votes (where they don't have the numbers but do it anyway to appease their base). They don't put out aggressive policy agendas because they don't want the Republicans to criticize them, instead they run like middle managers trying to ace the interview. Half of them can't articulate what they stand for besides being seen as decent and competent.

      Their biggest problem is that they are fundamentally conflict averse. Great in normal times when negotiation and compromise and mutuality are in vogue, utterly useless in this political moment. Only 10-15% of them in Congress have the will and skill to fight, most of them are just like panic-stricken bystanders shouting 'keep calm, keep calm!' and 'we're having a problem, we need to do something!'

      1 reply →

[flagged]

  • Sure, but there's a difference between voting for somebody more extreme because the existing options are ineffective, and supporting people with these attributes (pettiness, hatred, fascist-y behavior, incompetence, disrespect of laws/rights/citizens, disrespect of traditional US standards for leadership, etc).

  • Democracy makes problems much more visible. The "other ideas" will just hide problems much better

    • Hides them under a mountain of corpses with duct tape over their mouths. That's the only way these autocratic nightmares end.