Comment by lenerdenator
2 days ago
It needs to be far more focused than the last one.
We can come back from this, but some people need to spend a significant amount of their lives in prison.
2 days ago
It needs to be far more focused than the last one.
We can come back from this, but some people need to spend a significant amount of their lives in prison.
As a non American, I don't think you can get back from this unless you get rid of the 2-parties system. Identity politics is a big component to what compelled individuals to operate against their own interests and those of their country. Good luck, though.
I am not an American either, but there is a great deal of work on this subject, and the two-party system is actually one of the most resistant to single-individual or single-party takeover. The reason is that multi-party systems are vulnerable to having a party in power 'promoting diversity' (or something similar), in order to disempower all their opponents, while making it look like they're allowing for more views. Examples of this include quotas for minority representation, and (strategically designed) multi-member voting districts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Logic_of_Political_Surviva...
I have that book and am a big fan of it, but I think it needs some expansion in the light of the last few decades - not just in the US, but considering Brexit and both major parties subsequently burning through strings of short-lived leaders, coalition politics in places like Europe and Japan etc.
well this book was written in 2003 and current day events in USA clearly contradict this statement : "two-party system is actually one of the most resistant to single-individual or single-party takeover."
With lots of examples of contrary , where multi party system has not devolved in one man shit show.
4 replies →
In multi-party systems, the parties focus more on weakening their opponents and horse trading, as voters are divided and winning elections is dependent on an already razor-thin voting share. Look what's going on in India, for instance.
Parliamentary systems of other countries usually have the advantages of lessons learned since the American revolution. The necessary feature of the American system is countervailing powers, but as a uniparty for corporations or one weakened, it ceases to function and cannot be easily reformed or competed against with a new party. These are flaws addressed to some degree by parliamentary systems where new party(ies) can challenge incumbents more easily.
1 reply →
Secondary to the extreme corruption. Corruption is the issue that must be resolved before everything else. The fashions of political parties or their structures are superficial by comparison.
Two-parties system naturally evolve.
Get rid of money, punish lying, decrease the power of the Executive branch…
Lots to do, but getting rid of the two party system is a pipe dream.
They naturally evolve because we put them in an enviroment where they thrive. Changing voting systems to proportional representation instead of winner-takes-all would be a huge start.
> naturally
It's not nature, it's the strategic actions of members of those parties to create and protect that system. For example, look at laws in states that make it very difficult for 3rd parties to get on ballots, participate in debates, and then the expensive lawfare against them if they show any signs of life.
> getting rid of the two party system is a pipe dream
It certainly won't happen tomorrow, but the best time to start such things is today.
1 reply →
Eh. People have come back from worse. You can walk over the border between France and Germany.
Sure, and all it took was a systematic dismantling and building anew the whole government and a bunch of institutions, not exactly a "oh, the other party will figure something out over the course of the next term"
Very true. Daily reminder that by 1950 Germany was allowed an army again. Just don't mention the war.
You have Jared Kushner pulling a lot of strings on one side, and you have his brother, Josh Kushner, giving enormous amounts of money to the other side. They’re both incredibly evil. And it’s obvious that both sides completely disdain their civilian constituents, because their real constituents are corporations and oligarchs.
It’s not just the two party system. You have to get the money out out of politics before anything else can positively move back toward democracy.
[flagged]
What are you personally doing to prepare for "collapse" then?
Trying to establish ties with decent people in my community, physically staying in shape, training and learning. Ultimately, you have very little control over things when something large like government/societal collapse happens. All you can do is put yourself in a position where you can try to adapt to whatever may come.
Thanks 6 month old doom-and-gloom account!
>but some people need to spend a significant amount of their lives in prison.
Short of rewriting the constitution, that just isn't going to happen. The president is immune to prosecution for any crime committed in office and has unlimited power to pardon anyone else of any federal crimes.
And if the Democrats even attempt to do anything of the sort, people will just consider it a partisan witchhunt. It will be litigated all the way to a SCOTUS that's stacked with Trumpist ideologues.
People will correctly consider it a partisan witchhunt, but that is ultimately the only way back to "normal". Pack the court and start the prosecutions. Look at Hungary and Poland.
(The UK has the opportunity to do this before the fash get into power, but we can watch it being fumbled in real time)
> Short of rewriting the constitution, that just isn't going to happen
then a new constitution it is!
Realistically this is what the Constitutional convention mechanism is for, but for the last several decades the Democrats have viewed any suggestion of employing it as a Republican plot and have opted instead for not having a plan and trying to prop up a creaky status quo.
[dead]
no this is false and a superficial search confirms it. No need to make extensive citations because this level of talk does not warrant it.
provide one citation, then.
9 replies →
> a SCOTUS that's stacked with Trumpist ideologues.
It's majority conservative, but that's not the same thing as what you're claiming here.
It has 3 members appointed by Trump, but even that doesn't make them Trumpist ideologues.
I really can't find any other possible interpretation of their wall to wall decisions on anything election related. They are a knowing and enthusiastic participant in the coup.
3 replies →
I don't believe for a second that Trump, being the narcissist that he is, would appoint anyone but ideologues.
1 reply →
And doing so risks societal fractions against the idea of lawfare. It’s a lose lose situation.
That may be, but the consequences for not taking these bad actors to task would have worse and longer lasting consequences. The portion of society that will fracture the most loudly has already attempted to storm the seat of government after a national election. We've seen what they're capable of and I'm much less afraid of that than permanently mafiatizing basically every level of the Federal government.
Yes, but expect those prison sentences will be more popular than you might expect. The current admin expends an insane amount of energy pumping the size of their supposed fanbase.
Forgiving the south after the civil war led to Jim Crow. Forgiving most of the nazis after WW2 seems to be the reason nazis are rising again so quickly. Forgiveness has been given enough chances already. I think we should try giving the full punishment a try.
The British attempted “full punishment” against the American colonies and look where that got them. There are no easy solutions.
1 reply →
Not really. They'll get over it. Just gotta make the hole the perpetrators are in deep enough.
> Just gotta make the hole the perpetrators are in deep enough.
Oubliette [1^]: The dungeon you throw people in that you want to forget.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dungeon#/media/Fi...