this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2024
297 points (86.7% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2151 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com 9 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

So you're just all-in on autocratic rule then? Fight fire with fire, even though the forest is a mostly-dead tinderbox?

Yes, Biden will not assassinate Supreme Court justices. That's a strength. If the Supreme Court intends to give a president king-like power, then I'm sure as hell going to vote for a president that I don't believe will exercise that power.

As soon as we have a president that exercises the power of a king, left or right, there will be no going back. That power will corrupt left politicians just as surely as right, institutions will begin to act corruptly causing people to lower their expectations of the rule of law, freeing institutions to be corrupted further, in an endless cycle. Mexico is far down that spiral, despite nominal "left" politics. And if we even seen another "president" in our lifetime they will only slip further down the slope. The only way you can win this game is by not letting it begin.

[–] splonglo@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

How do you not let it begin? That supreme court ruling isn't going anywhere. Even if Biden wins this time, what about the next election, or the one after that? Right wing politicians have said they want to kill their enemies and the loaded gun is staying on the table for a very long time.

[–] hypnoton@discuss.online -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I despise autocracies but if my foe forces me into an autocratic ruleset, I will be ruthless and lightning quick. Don't like it? Don't even think about establishing an autocratic ruleset. Meanwhile while an autocratic ruleset is still in effect I will use it to end it in a spectacularly bloody manner. Once the autocratic ruleset is over and all the relevant individuals thirsty for autocracy have been properly dealt with, I will return to being an institutionalist.

[–] ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

Sorry to be so blunt, but you're sharing a fantasy. The outcome will be no different from a right-wing autocratic takeover, even if it starts out more in your favor. The institutions of democracy will be destroyed either way.

You use "ruleset" like this is a game, but there's no change-back in "ruleset" without a bloody revolution, after probably decades of suffering, and decades of reconstruction, if that - I expect we won't see a return to pre-autocratic democracy in our lifetimes. Modern autocratic rule is too savvy, they will maintain the facades of our institutions while hollowing them out and making them meaningless, leading to efficient, soul-draining, Orwellian oppression like in Russia.

What you're describing is a technical victory when you've also conceded that the playing board will be destroyed. And it won't work as a deterrent. The opponent is irrational.

[–] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 5 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Sorry to be so blunt, but you’re sharing a fantasy.

Yeah, expecting any Democrat to wield power they've been handed is ridiculous.

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

They don’t realize we’ve already lost, and we’re never going back to normal.

[–] hypnoton@discuss.online 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

SCOTUS has changed the rules.

If you can't come to terms with what has happened, the one living in a fantasy land is you.

Any American who does not think we are electing a King this November is a dangerously ignorant citizen.

[–] ReallyActuallyFrankenstein@lemmynsfw.com 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

No, we agree that we're electing a person with the power to be a king. That's already objectively awful. The way it could get worse is if we elect someone who will actually use the power of a king. Because that moment is the end of the game, not merely an escalation.

Right now we have a candidate that I think we both agree will not use that power. Holding the presidency and keeping it away from those who would use that power is the best outcome, until enough Supreme Court justices turn over (which could even be a single 4-year term, though it's not likely).

[–] hypnoton@discuss.online 4 points 4 months ago (2 children)

No the game is over when the rules change.

If you are playing hockey and suddenly a referee with real authority over the game starts using the rules of basketball, hockey is OVER no matter what the players do. It doesn't matter what the players do.

[–] zbyte64@awful.systems 2 points 4 months ago

The participation trophy is no longer just an "I voted" sticker, it comes with a bullet of you don't like the results: https://youtu.be/-OdM4_WO2wk

[–] TokenBoomer@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Pretty sure, after the debate, we’re playing golf /s