checks and balances is not a lie it just does not work when folks don’t do their job. its like they did the patriot act because bush jr. didn’t do his job. No system can work when a significant amount of the components are bad actors.
I wouldn’t say democrats are in on it. I would say democrats are being lead by the same strings. It all ties back to the money. GOP and DNC alike are results of private interests. Now, how the private interests align cant really be known but it is something to think about. I mean its safe to assume thier only function is to amass more wealth but then we are just talking about capitalism.
Truth is, normal people arent part of the equation they are a remainder that gets deemed negligible or shuffled to the side. Its absurd, really, when they are the driving force but to consider them anything other than a statistic is against all modern theories of capitalism.
This is probably the wrong venue for this discussion but I just wanted to say, I dont think democrats are in on it but are just as much chess pieces being moved around as the GOP are.
Dems are in on it too. Look at insider trading and Nancy pelosi. There is money to be made by them so they’re not in a hurry to change things either for the greater good.
The fact that everyone is stuck on Nancy Pelosi when there the list of people making money off their station in government goes on and on. Mostly just sexism.
Yeah you can’t be taught about future failures of a system. The only way for it not be able to not be working is for humans to not be in the equation of government. Which is one of the reasons ai taking over does not scare me. Either they kill us all. Win for the planet. Or they run things properly. Win for everybody.
Its incredibly robust. Its lasted over two hundred years through several constitutional crises. Its possible it might even survive this. Whats happening now required complacency of a majority of both houses of congress, a large swath of the judiciary, plus the executive. Thats pretty damn robust. Its like saying a bridge is not robust even though its stayed up when some of its supports got destroyed but once over half of them were taken out it finally started to crack.
It didn’t last over two hundred years. It failed utterly in 1861 and wasn’t restored until 1865. That was only 160 years ago.
It probably would’ve failed again in the 1930s but the Roosevelt Democrats were able to take control of both the legislative and executive branches and make the checks and balances irrelevant, and then the rest of the world bombed itself into the dirt, allowing America to become fat and rich enough that you didn’t notice the rot.
fend off some shitty people from destroying it. Not a majority of elected positions. Again your expectations of robust go beyond anything that is feasible. With a monarchy one monarch can bring it down. Despite the orange buffoon he would not be able to do it without all the congress collaborators. His first term was actually a constitutional crises we got passed. Barely.
checks and balances is not a lie it just does not work when folks don’t do their job. its like they did the patriot act because bush jr. didn’t do his job. No system can work when a significant amount of the components are bad actors.
Yeah, we entrusted too many shitty people.
Threat actors are colluding… Democrats included
I wouldn’t say democrats are in on it. I would say democrats are being lead by the same strings. It all ties back to the money. GOP and DNC alike are results of private interests. Now, how the private interests align cant really be known but it is something to think about. I mean its safe to assume thier only function is to amass more wealth but then we are just talking about capitalism.
Truth is, normal people arent part of the equation they are a remainder that gets deemed negligible or shuffled to the side. Its absurd, really, when they are the driving force but to consider them anything other than a statistic is against all modern theories of capitalism.
This is probably the wrong venue for this discussion but I just wanted to say, I dont think democrats are in on it but are just as much chess pieces being moved around as the GOP are.
I can get behind that… They are both regime whores with specific functions.
They dont call to shots, they execute daddy’s master plans.
Dems are in on it too. Look at insider trading and Nancy pelosi. There is money to be made by them so they’re not in a hurry to change things either for the greater good.
The fact that everyone is stuck on Nancy Pelosi when there the list of people making money off their station in government goes on and on. Mostly just sexism.
Nah just perfect example because of the wealth she’s accumulated. All of them are shitty people only looking out for themselves.
I read: “checks and balances do not work”
They arent working. Att least the checks and balances we have now.
Yeah you can’t be taught about future failures of a system. The only way for it not be able to not be working is for humans to not be in the equation of government. Which is one of the reasons ai taking over does not scare me. Either they kill us all. Win for the planet. Or they run things properly. Win for everybody.
They dont teach future failures but they do teach the robustness of our checks and balances.
Which turns our to be not very.
Its incredibly robust. Its lasted over two hundred years through several constitutional crises. Its possible it might even survive this. Whats happening now required complacency of a majority of both houses of congress, a large swath of the judiciary, plus the executive. Thats pretty damn robust. Its like saying a bridge is not robust even though its stayed up when some of its supports got destroyed but once over half of them were taken out it finally started to crack.
It didn’t last over two hundred years. It failed utterly in 1861 and wasn’t restored until 1865. That was only 160 years ago.
It probably would’ve failed again in the 1930s but the Roosevelt Democrats were able to take control of both the legislative and executive branches and make the checks and balances irrelevant, and then the rest of the world bombed itself into the dirt, allowing America to become fat and rich enough that you didn’t notice the rot.
“Watches an orange buffoon turn the government into a authoritarian regime.”
Its incredibly robust!
Same time, “the American experiment”, “a young democracy”, “27 constitutional ammendments”, etc.
You’re missing the whole point. If majority are shitty people, that’s what you get.
Youre missing the point, government was suppose to be designed to fend off shitty people destroying it.
Edit:
Listen, Im taking this position not because Im particularly enthusiastic about it but really just trying it on for size.
Is there anything else you would like to add to bolster your position? Im sure these is more nuance and I havent hit on it yet.
fend off some shitty people from destroying it. Not a majority of elected positions. Again your expectations of robust go beyond anything that is feasible. With a monarchy one monarch can bring it down. Despite the orange buffoon he would not be able to do it without all the congress collaborators. His first term was actually a constitutional crises we got passed. Barely.