this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2025
426 points (93.1% liked)

No Stupid Questions

36482 readers
2485 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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] masquenox@lemmy.dbzer0.com 10 points 2 hours ago

a hegemony with a 100-years tradition of upkeeping democracy against major non-democratic players

Your proof of this is... what?

[–] Matombo@feddit.org 26 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

It's funny that Germany has safeguards against nazis in power in it's constitution which was designed ~~by~~ in cooperation with the USA, France and GB, yet afaik all three don't have similar mechanics in their own constitutions because they never belived to have to deal with the next hitler themselfs.

Lets take out the politica for a moment, and just look at railroads

This is what I call the "Old Railroad Theory":

The US build the railroad/subways so long ago, that most of it is now in decay and as far as I know, none of the US has any Platform Safety Barriers, and people could just fall on the tracks (see NYC)

In constrast, in China (PRC), because most subways are only recently built, they are much more modern, air-conditioned, and have Platform Safety Barriers, preventing any "fall on tracks" incidents. (I've seen first hand the subway in GuangZhou, they look much nicer than NYC, when I first got to NYC, the tracks were terrifying for me, I alwats have intrusive thoughts about falling in)

Its because once you build a system, its unlikely to get replaced even when better technology comes along. Too much cost to replace, politicians don't care.

Same thing with Constitutions.

It was written do long ago, now its too late to add new ideas like Defensive Democracy. 3/4 of US legislature means its almost impossible to add it as an amendment.

(Btw, Germany has a AfD problem, that they still haven't banned yet... 👀)

[–] Matombo@feddit.org 9 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

PS.: With the current trend we will find out in about the next decade if the safeguards work ...

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 4 points 2 hours ago

Decade? More like 3 months. He's already doing wildly unconstitutional things. If the Supreme Court refuses to take on challenges to it or outright approves it, well, they didn't work.

[–] Hupf@feddit.org 0 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago)

Ich sage: nieder mit diesen Gesetzen!

Macht Deutschland wieder Groß

You mean that way, approximately?

[–] Daerun@lemmy.world 33 points 4 hours ago

If you really believe that the USA has "100-years tradition of upkeeping democracy against major non-democratic players" you are in delusion.

[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 13 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

That's what 2a is supposed to be for

[–] Klear@lemmy.world 8 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

2A is supposed to facilitate millitias in case England attacks again.

[–] Hossenfeffer 7 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

... in case England attacks again.

I have been thinking about coming over there with a cricket bat.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 39 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 11 hours ago)

Ah fuck you really going to make me infodump I hate you sm fr


Part 1: The Two Parties

In the 1960s Civil Rights movement a deep political polarization began which results in wealthy interests backing the Republican party more and more, President Ronald Reagan in return shifted the party away from unions and towards deregulated and low tax markets and industries, and when Democrats introduced a campaign finance reform to curb the issue in 1995 it failed but was reintroduced and passed in 2002 it furthered that divide yet again, that bill was then sued by Citizens United wealthy interests and the SCOTUS sided with Citizens United as a Partisan 5-4 decision. So now we live in a world where political divide has all of the wealthy interests backing one side whose policies are actually extremely unpopular but people are easily misled into not knowing the stances of people they are voting for, or misled on the repercussions of those actions.

Figure 1: Partisanship of Congressmen

Figure 2: Partisanship of citizens


Part 2: Legislative Requirements of the USA

The USA has steps to pass laws:

  • It gets called to vote by majority leader and passes the House of Representatives, which is capped at 435 congressmen allotted very very roughly proportional to the state populations.

  • It gets called to vote by majority leader and passes the Senate with a simple majority of 51 votes, unless a handful of senators decide to filibuster it to delay the vote indefinitely, in which case the bill gets amended with concessions and sent back to the House for yet another round of voting. Filibuster can be bypassed with 60 votes which is basically impossible due to aforementioned partisanship.

  • The president signs it into law.

Now the problem here is that to remove a congressman, the president, or a supreme court judge: you need 60 votes following a successful impeachment inquiry. So it never happens.


Part 3: Foreign Interests

Influential media from the Murdochs, the Kochs, and the CCP are constantly pushing the USA further into the grave they've been digging for 50 years. China has always been a source of cheap labor and the relationship soured greatly following the Chinese influences on Korean and Japanese elections during the time those two nations were rebuilding following the World War era and were under the watchful eye of the US Military who were a central figure in the aforementioned conflict. This divide deepened with the 1984 Tienanmen Square Massacre where cities all over China were quelled by military forces being deployed on their own people. But far from being the end of it, the Pacific was still a prime trade route where the USA sought profits, and so Chinese influence continued to spread more as the days went by.


Part 4: Where We Are Now

President Obama was denied a lifelong SCOTUS nomination in an election year, giving the nomination to Donald Trump.

Donald Trump was granted yet another lifelong SCOTUS nomination in an election year. The SCOTUS was thusly deeply conservative.

His court nominations allowed him to run for office despite not qualifying under the insurrection clause, because if the courts choose not to reverse a lower court decision that he wasn't barred from office then nobody is enforcing the law.

Billionaires bought or operated their own home made social medias in the USA, the CCP deployed TikTok campaigns to elect a fascist.

This isn't just a thing that happened which we were unprepared for. It's a thing that has been happening for decades which so many of us have been desperately attempting to stop.

[–] Professorozone@lemmy.world 7 points 9 hours ago

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

[–] PanArab@lemm.ee 19 points 11 hours ago (2 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 14 points 11 hours ago

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

[–] yarr@feddit.nl 0 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I am learning that in modern America, Nazi is just anyone they don't like.

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

Actively spreading hate towards the LGBTQ community and making some of the most marginalised people isn't nazi enough for you? What a sick world we live in.

[–] VerifiedSource@sh.itjust.works 0 points 12 minutes ago

This very liberal use of Nazi and fascist as a epithet has devalued its meaning.

Hate is not enough. The Nazis did far more than spread hate. National-Socialism was much more coherent and thought through ideology than Trumpism/MAGA is today.

Nazi might be useful as an expression of anger and resentment, but it’s not conducive to serious analysis or discourse regarding the situation.

[–] samus12345@lemm.ee 73 points 16 hours ago (11 children)

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

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 11 points 11 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 5 hours ago

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

[–] Objection@lemmy.ml 50 points 15 hours ago (3 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 36 points 12 hours ago (4 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.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 35 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (4 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."

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›