this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2025
479 points (93.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

36501 readers
1651 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

You'd think a hegemony with a 100-years tradition of upkeeping democracy against major non-democratic players, would have some mechanism that would prevent itself from throwing down it's key ideology.

Is it really that the president is all that decides about the future of democracy itself? Is 53 out of 100 senate seats really enough to make country fall into authoritarian regime? Is the army really not constitutionally obliged to step in and save the day?

I'd never think that, of all places, American democracy would be the most volatile.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] humanspiral@lemmy.ca -4 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

The US empire chooses to ally with any group who opposes Russia or uses mineral/oil wealth as significant public welfare enhancement instead of enriching their rulership or privatizing for cheap bribes to US national champions, and not being a US weapons customer. This already makes the US empire a demonic evil fascist force. It calling apartheid ethnostates of Ukraine and Israel "great democracies", and all elections that go against it "rigged" is an ultra fascist view. Control over colonies media is control over their democracy, and control over their people to ensure subservience of allies. Internally, to US, there is always money for the empire and the oligarchy, never for people.

The veneer of democracy and "rules based world order allies" is a BS that helps with its demonism. But removing the veneer to demand more tribute from colonies, and Americans is not change. It simply removes the emperor's veil/clothing. If voting could change anything, it would be illegal.

Trump can help Americans realize this. But if you were praising US democracy/values before this, you simply were not paying attention closely enough.

Is the army really not constitutionally obliged to step in and save the day?

The constitution is no protection against the Army. A military coup does not necessarily mean a more militarist US, or anti-American, anti-pluralist/liberty government. Asking/supporting the military to depose corrupt leaders should be based on that corruption, not looking up whether a nation's constitution permits it (they never do).

[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 77 points 1 day ago (6 children)

He knew it from the beginning. People didn't listen.

[–] Kolanaki@yiffit.net 34 points 1 day ago (1 children)

He also didn't want to be president or have his face on money. They really just ignored the dude.

[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 19 points 1 day ago

I guess ignoring Washington's wishes foreshadowed what the US would eventually become.

[–] Ohmmy@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 21 hours ago (5 children)

Who would have thought a government created in model of a constitutional monarchy would do this?

Oh right, all the people who opposed the US constitution. People forget the Anti Federalists every time.

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[–] PanArab@lemm.ee 23 points 20 hours ago (5 children)

What’s your definition of Nazi? I would think Andrew Jackson still a worse president than Trump. And not even the Supreme Court was able to stop him

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 16 points 19 hours ago

That mofo made it to the $20 bill. Sick.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 53 points 1 day ago (2 children)

The CIA can always assassinate a president who gets too far out of line, ~~like what happened to JFK,~~ but they don't tend to mind the right so much as the left.

[–] rickyrigatoni@lemm.ee 38 points 21 hours ago (5 children)

Trump spent his first term selling classified documents to enemies of the state that revealed the identities of CIA operatives and got them killed and so far they have done nothing about it. I think it's safe to say the CIA is not as scary as hollywood wants us to believe.

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 13 points 21 hours ago

The CIA is not great at high profile assassination, their declassified documents are plenty scary though.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] IDKWhatUsernametoPutHereLolol@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Law enforcement tends to lean conservative...

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 36 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (2 children)

Yes, the President can be impeached and removed by Congress. On the opposite side of the coin a President can veto laws passed by Congress, which Congress can override but it's harder than passing a law. The problem is when Congress also goes nazi at the same time. In that case we're fucked. In fact I think Article 97 sub-paragraph E13/W even says, "Such conditions and circumstances shall by Law constitute Fuckage."

[–] Gammelfisch@lemmy.world 6 points 19 hours ago

If the US military goes Nazi, then the USA is beyond fucked.

[–] nova_ad_vitum@lemmy.ca 7 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (2 children)

Cool, but half the country supports this shit. And no, people who don't vote don't matter in this context.

[–] Freefall@lemmy.world 20 points 20 hours ago

That is by design. If the "majority" of the country wants the US to be Nazis, that is the direction it will go. That is how a representative democracy works. The flaw was the founders assuming retarded puppets would not be elected by even an uneducated public. But, they also didn't plan for automatic weapons either. Well, they sort of did, they said we should be rewriting the constitution every so many years so it can evolve with the times, but we chose to enshrine and misinterpret it like a civic bible. Oops.

[–] Soggy@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Then maybe they should have their own shithole country and stop taking our tax dollars.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Professorozone@lemmy.world 7 points 17 hours ago

Apparently that's what America wants. You mean for a possible future where it's a bad thing?

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 13 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Impeachment. That's it.

But you're also forgetting that in the US states have a significant amount of power. For example the President cannot cancel elections. If a state cancels elections they just don't get counted.

There's a lot in that particular area that shields people from federal government stupidity.

[–] Soggy@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

They can ignore election results though, or fraudulently certify them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] merc@sh.itjust.works 48 points 1 day ago (10 children)

It turns out that a handful of young land-owning white men from the 1700s, born almost 200 years before the advent of game theory, didn't actually properly anticipate every way in which the political system they were designing could fail.

[–] andros_rex@lemmy.world 4 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Is it really failure by their standards? How many of them owned slaves? How many of them viewed women as essentially property?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] hesusingthespiritbomb@lemmy.world 12 points 21 hours ago (4 children)

Just to be clear, your solution to saving democracy would be for the military to usurp a president who received the majority of the vote less than six months ago?

[–] door_in_the_face@feddit.nl 4 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

Sometimes a voting population needs to be protected from the consequences of their vote, right? A good chunk of the German voting population in the 1930 voted the NSDAP and Hitler into power, and we can agree that it would have been for the best if that party and its leadership had been deposed ASAP. Now, the US isn't quite that far down the slide yet, but they're certainly slipping, and the worst part is that the checks and balances that are supposed to keep a president in line are also failing. Not to be alarmist, but we're in for a wild ride.

[–] hesusingthespiritbomb@lemmy.world 5 points 16 hours ago (2 children)

Your first question is pretty philosophical. All I can say, is that most representative governments place a huge emphasis on giving the people the power to write their own collective destiny.

A military takeover based on the desires of a minority of citizens would violate that principal. I don't think any reasonable person can call it saving democracy.

[–] kadup@lemmy.world 2 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

a huge emphasis on giving the people the power to write their own collective destiny.

A functional democracy is not a dictatorship of the majority, and people from the US love making this mistake. It is true that the president gets elected by a majority vote... but this person now represents everyone, including the minority that opposes them. They do not have the right to sink the ship and kill everyone because the majority thinks that's a good idea.

It is natural that their government will make decisions aligned with their voters (in theory) but they shouldn't be allowed to actively undermine the rights of everyone else.

No matter how inflated your perception of your "flawless" constitution and democracy is, this is something many countries understand pretty well and yours struggles with.

[–] door_in_the_face@feddit.nl 1 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago)

Yes, but it is a question that is pertinent to the situation. What do you do if a population elects someone that starts undermining their democracy? I understand that forcibly taking that person's power away is in itself anti-democratic, but if their actions are even worse, then it would be justified right? A smaller anti-democratic act to stop the larger anti-democratic effort where they're dismantling the democratic system that put them in power.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 17 points 23 hours ago

He's just a symptom of the real problem, which is that he exposed himself as a nazi a long time ago and still got reelected.

[–] BigBenis@lemmy.world 27 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Our government leans heavily on decorum and good faith. Trump's success has been due to his refusal to adhere to decorum and good faith. Our system doesn't know how to handle that other than shaming and shaking fists so Trump gets free reign to do whatever he wants.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Second Amendment.

The odds aren't in our favor.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›