Democracy supporters have to win every single time, while the fascists only have to win once. This is not a sustainable situation. We have to do what is necessary in a way that’s a lot more permanent than just winning an election.
Did Harris have any pro-democracy stuff in her platform, like ending FPTP or the Electoral College? Trump campaigned on bad election reforms like ID requirements and same-day voting.
That requires carrying this energy past the election cycle, regardless of the differences we may have on opinion, and coming together in agreement.
Historically, the Left has been rather poor at banding together. We’re more likely to argue than get things done most of the time. So it’ll be an uphill battle for leaders of smaller groups across the Nation. First though, we need to make it past this hurdle.
It’s still a choice that we should strive to utilize. Not doing so may mean not having that choice, or the illusion of one. I do agree though, it’s about time we shifted things back towards a better life for everyone.
I think a big part of this is rural over representation. Not even talking the senate, but the house to be fair should allot 1 rep per the minimum pop of any state, which would give us about 573 reps and like 676 electors for president. Hell if we did it as the founders intended, one per like 60k people we’d have a house of 5.6k members.
“…The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independant 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure. Our Convention has been too much impressed by the insurrection of Massachusets: and in the spur of the moment they are setting up a kite to keep the hen yard in order. I hope in god this article will be rectified before the new constitution is accepted.”
Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, Nov 13, 1787
I also have this weird feeling that there was some assumption of gentleman’s decorum back then even with those one disagreed with.
I appreciate his “forgive them, educate them, and move on” ideal. As if surely, once they’ve learned how things are, they will calm down! I wish it were that way.
But I think he’d be (im/de)pressed with just how low the bar has fallen when it comes to civil human behavior, general education esp. in civic affairs, and practical reasoning.
There is no line too far anymore. There is no punishment for violating foundational social contracts or civil discourse.
One half is constantly flabbergasted that the other half keeps flagrantly violating the power of their office and saying “So what? I’m winning.”
We’re just so far past the point of reason now.
Edit: Also remember, Jefferson wrote this long before the Civil War. I believe his point in “forgive them and move on” was optimistically more in the interest of preserving the young Republic at all costs, rather than letting it crumble from the inside with internal feuds. (As is the fate of many rebellions)
Considering we had things like fist fight, a near fatal beating with a cane, etc on the floor of congress back then, I don’t think much of their old timey decorum
I don’t think your assumption is accurate. They famously started shooting at a government because they taxed them a little more than they wanted to be taxed (to pay for a war we started).
They did a great job at that. It has lasted 248 years. But they also gave us a framework for updating our constitution and government, and that has been sorely neglected for a long time. The founders were wise enough to recognize that the system would need to change as times changed. What they didn’t seem to anticipate is the insane tribalism created by technologies that weren’t even a dream at the time, and how that tribalism would grind our government to a halt.
Fascism was defeated because of the Allies, led by the US, the country with the most powerful military in the world by a large margin. Who’s going to defeat the US if it goes full fascist?
80% of Nazi casualties happened on the eastern front by the Communists. But yeah, the Soviet Union no longer exists, Russia has fallen to fascism, and now the US has too. The world is fucked.
It’s a good question that I don’t have the answer to, but I don’t think the USA would be able to continue funding a military 20x the expense of the next most powerful military while under authoritarian rule. We have the funds for such a military now because of a hundred different conditions that wouldn’t exist anymore under a fascist government.
The US spends 3.4% of GDP in defence. Israel is at 5.3%. Also the US only spends a bit more then 3x what China spends and well US products are more expensive. So the US can probably fund its military for quite some time, without too many problems and right wingers love to do it, to bomb the shit out of people.
Fascist governments always collapse eventually because of loyalty over competence, but the thought of the damage a powerful country like the US would do before that collapse is terrifying.
I questioned if I should add more context, but people will suffer a lot of hardship if the global economy is flipped upside down. It’s not the rich assholes I worry about, it’s the common person who will struggle to find a job or buy milk.
So what, at you going to start the french US revolution? That seems like a extreme idea that probably won’t end well.
The US is a democracy. There is no threat outside of the fake information spread by US adversaries. Even if the worse president is elected there still little danger because of the balance of power.
Don’t believe me? Look at the past. The supreme court and congress has put the executive branch in its place before. There is not more danger now than there was centuries ago. The US system is far from perfect but it is well proven.
The supreme court and congress has put the executive branch in its place before.
The SC betrayed democracy with Citizens United and again when they gave Trump immunity for his countless crimes while in office. Don’t forget that the SC openly take bribes from billionaires.
I hope you are right, but excuse me for having doubts. Both Congress and SCOTUS is much more partisan than it was in the past. SCOTUS’s ruling on presidential immunity is a direct example, eroding the checks and balances within the Constitution. McConnell’s behavior and vote during the Jan 6th Impeachment trial is a second example. Trump’s first term in 2016 started with him having no idea what he was doing, so he depended on establishment Republicans who would act as the adults in the room. That term ended with him having fired all of them, and with an attempted coup to stay in power. So far there have been no repercussions to him doing so. So yeah, excuse me for being worried about a potential “dictator on day one” who wants to deport millions of “illegals”, would send the military against his political opponents who he has labeled the “enemy within”, and to completely purge career public servants for loyalists (are you looking forward to Hershal Walker managing our National Missile Defense?).
I mean hey you’re right, we’re still here…but we’d really REALLY like to prevent a second one of those…From the reviews I’ve read it wasn’t a fun time for pretty much anybody involved.
There was never any democracy here to save, and no way to make it sustainable without tearing down the constitution and starting over, and no way to hold a new constitutional convention that wouldn’t be poisoned by money and power from the start.
You’re not completely wrong. There are many aspects of our system that are deeplh undemocratic: the way that the donor class gatekeeps who is able to run, the way politicians serve lobbyists and donors over the public will, and the way that oligarchs own 95% of our news media all create an environment where the interests of the people are not represented by our government
Democracy supporters have to win every single time, while the fascists only have to win once. This is not a sustainable situation. We have to do what is necessary in a way that’s a lot more permanent than just winning an election.
thats exactly why voting is not a solution.
That’s only going to happen if the side in favor of democracy is given a decisive victory. Squeaking out another win isn’t going to be enough.
Did Harris have any pro-democracy stuff in her platform, like ending FPTP or the Electoral College? Trump campaigned on bad election reforms like ID requirements and same-day voting.
Indeed, the first step would be to dump the Electoral College.
Preferably out the back of a C130 just off the coast of Florida.
An AC-130U. We can play a game of see how many times you can hit it with the side guns before it lands in the ocean.
That requires carrying this energy past the election cycle, regardless of the differences we may have on opinion, and coming together in agreement.
Historically, the Left has been rather poor at banding together. We’re more likely to argue than get things done most of the time. So it’ll be an uphill battle for leaders of smaller groups across the Nation. First though, we need to make it past this hurdle.
Voting for Democrats isn’t even voting for the Left anymore. More Rlite.
It hasn’t been a left wing vote for a long time, if ever.
It’s still a choice that we should strive to utilize. Not doing so may mean not having that choice, or the illusion of one. I do agree though, it’s about time we shifted things back towards a better life for everyone.
I think a big part of this is rural over representation. Not even talking the senate, but the house to be fair should allot 1 rep per the minimum pop of any state, which would give us about 573 reps and like 676 electors for president. Hell if we did it as the founders intended, one per like 60k people we’d have a house of 5.6k members.
Unfortunately the huge land owners want unequal representation, and they have a lot of power.
So anyways, I started
blastinteaching my loved ones how to safely build guillotines.The founders thought they inoculated us against tyranny in 1776.
They also had slaves. A lot of slaves. Maybe we shouldn’t accept their fight against tyranny at face value.
Also, if they’re so smart, then why are they dead?
They did, but you gotta get your booster shots every now and then.
“…The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. We have had 13. states independant 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country before ever existed a century and half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure. Our Convention has been too much impressed by the insurrection of Massachusets: and in the spur of the moment they are setting up a kite to keep the hen yard in order. I hope in god this article will be rectified before the new constitution is accepted.”
Good goddamn, Jefferson was wrong again. I bet this is what a lot of judges are thinking about when looking at J6 cases.
I also have this weird feeling that there was some assumption of gentleman’s decorum back then even with those one disagreed with.
I appreciate his “forgive them, educate them, and move on” ideal. As if surely, once they’ve learned how things are, they will calm down! I wish it were that way.
But I think he’d be (im/de)pressed with just how low the bar has fallen when it comes to civil human behavior, general education esp. in civic affairs, and practical reasoning. There is no line too far anymore. There is no punishment for violating foundational social contracts or civil discourse.
One half is constantly flabbergasted that the other half keeps flagrantly violating the power of their office and saying “So what? I’m winning.”
We’re just so far past the point of reason now.
Edit: Also remember, Jefferson wrote this long before the Civil War. I believe his point in “forgive them and move on” was optimistically more in the interest of preserving the young Republic at all costs, rather than letting it crumble from the inside with internal feuds. (As is the fate of many rebellions)
Considering we had things like fist fight, a near fatal beating with a cane, etc on the floor of congress back then, I don’t think much of their old timey decorum
I don’t think your assumption is accurate. They famously started shooting at a government because they taxed them a little more than they wanted to be taxed (to pay for a war we started).
They did a great job at that. It has lasted 248 years. But they also gave us a framework for updating our constitution and government, and that has been sorely neglected for a long time. The founders were wise enough to recognize that the system would need to change as times changed. What they didn’t seem to anticipate is the insane tribalism created by technologies that weren’t even a dream at the time, and how that tribalism would grind our government to a halt.
you guys need to force a reform.
Huzzah!
Not really. The fascists won in Germany, yet they’re not currently fascist. Nothing is forever.
Fascism was defeated because of the Allies, led by the US, the country with the most powerful military in the world by a large margin. Who’s going to defeat the US if it goes full fascist?
80% of Nazi casualties happened on the eastern front by the Communists. But yeah, the Soviet Union no longer exists, Russia has fallen to fascism, and now the US has too. The world is fucked.
Some appreciation for the Hezbollah please, they know that and they don’t care
I can’t disagree.
It’s a good question that I don’t have the answer to, but I don’t think the USA would be able to continue funding a military 20x the expense of the next most powerful military while under authoritarian rule. We have the funds for such a military now because of a hundred different conditions that wouldn’t exist anymore under a fascist government.
The US spends 3.4% of GDP in defence. Israel is at 5.3%. Also the US only spends a bit more then 3x what China spends and well US products are more expensive. So the US can probably fund its military for quite some time, without too many problems and right wingers love to do it, to bomb the shit out of people.
Fascist governments always collapse eventually because of loyalty over competence, but the thought of the damage a powerful country like the US would do before that collapse is terrifying.
I mean, Russia has been a fascist country for 30 years now and they haven’t collapsed
It is. Even just the economic damage that the world would suffer is horrifying.
I questioned if I should add more context, but people will suffer a lot of hardship if the global economy is flipped upside down. It’s not the rich assholes I worry about, it’s the common person who will struggle to find a job or buy milk.
The EU will … oh wait, nevermind
So what, at you going to start the
frenchUS revolution? That seems like a extreme idea that probably won’t end well.The US is a democracy. There is no threat outside of the fake information spread by US adversaries. Even if the worse president is elected there still little danger because of the balance of power.
Don’t believe me? Look at the past. The supreme court and congress has put the executive branch in its place before. There is not more danger now than there was centuries ago. The US system is far from perfect but it is well proven.
The SC betrayed democracy with Citizens United and again when they gave Trump immunity for his countless crimes while in office. Don’t forget that the SC openly take bribes from billionaires.
I hope you are right, but excuse me for having doubts. Both Congress and SCOTUS is much more partisan than it was in the past. SCOTUS’s ruling on presidential immunity is a direct example, eroding the checks and balances within the Constitution. McConnell’s behavior and vote during the Jan 6th Impeachment trial is a second example. Trump’s first term in 2016 started with him having no idea what he was doing, so he depended on establishment Republicans who would act as the adults in the room. That term ended with him having fired all of them, and with an attempted coup to stay in power. So far there have been no repercussions to him doing so. So yeah, excuse me for being worried about a potential “dictator on day one” who wants to deport millions of “illegals”, would send the military against his political opponents who he has labeled the “enemy within”, and to completely purge career public servants for loyalists (are you looking forward to Hershal Walker managing our National Missile Defense?).
The way you describe American history as “centuries” like we’re the Roman Empire or Egypt when we’ve only got 2.5 centuries to choose from.
Being a continuation of England more or less, you’ve got more. Especially since those democratic traditions were pretty English in the beginning.
Fair but my point still stands. We’ve been here a long time and though much worse times. (The US civil war comes to mind)
I mean hey you’re right, we’re still here…but we’d really REALLY like to prevent a second one of those…From the reviews I’ve read it wasn’t a fun time for pretty much anybody involved.
There is no chance of a second civil war. The current “crisis” is artificial and brought on by the media.
The revolution will not be hosted on the fediverse.
There was never any democracy here to save, and no way to make it sustainable without tearing down the constitution and starting over, and no way to hold a new constitutional convention that wouldn’t be poisoned by money and power from the start.
You’re not completely wrong. There are many aspects of our system that are deeplh undemocratic: the way that the donor class gatekeeps who is able to run, the way politicians serve lobbyists and donors over the public will, and the way that oligarchs own 95% of our news media all create an environment where the interests of the people are not represented by our government