11–20 of 88 posts
The Senate binned Republicanism when they murdered the Gracchi.
Agreed. Once the taboo of violence against other officials in the state got broken, all hell broke loose.
Not that they’re wrong, but the people (at least almost half of them) voted for someone who promised to break these norms. As far as I’m concerned, we signed a contract for 4 years of bull in china shop. Smart people need to be focusing on he silver lining and coming up with new, better norms and institutions that we will need when the rage winds down.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. Once the taboo of violence against other officials in the state got broken, all hell broke loose.
This implies that once a political norm is broken, it will forever be broken. That does not bode well for our current political situation in the US.
The Senate binned Republicanism when they murdered the Gracchi.
Sulla had an opportunity to fix everything, but he misidentified the symptoms for the disease, formalizing the cursus honorum and stripping power from the Assembly, instead of changing the incentive structure of the Senate and addressing wealth inequality.
The economist has been freaking out about norms destruction since day 1 of the trump whitehouse. This “book review” seems like just another chance to sound their favorite alarm. Not that they’re wrong, but the people (at least almost half of them) voted for someone who promised to break these norms. As far as I’m concerned, we signed a contract for 4 years of bull in china shop. Smart people need to be focusing on he…
It is in every politician's best interest to obstruct their opponents, prevent their opponents from voting, destroy ballots, jail their enemies on made-up charges, halt investigations into themselves, pack the court that will oversee their cases with allies, etc.
"Democratic norms" are a gentlemen's agreement to not use these highly effective tactics against each other, in the mutual interest of republicanism and democracy. They are highly advantageous, but the consequences are dire.
This is why, during the Obama presidency when Republicans first started deploying them, they called it "the nuclear option". Once one side has gone nuclear, the other side must reciprocate or die.
The economist has been freaking out about norms destruction since day 1 of the trump whitehouse. This “book review” seems like just another chance to sound their favorite alarm. Not that they’re wrong, but the people (at least almost half of them) voted for someone who promised to break these norms. As far as I’m concerned, we signed a contract for 4 years of bull in china shop. Smart people need to be focusing on he…
Isn't this a necessary action in order to preserve any semblance of norms? If no one said anything, we'd just silently drift to a new field, let alone a moved set of goalposts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agreed. Once the taboo of violence against other officials in the state got broken, all hell broke loose.
This implies that once a political norm is broken, it will forever be broken. That does not bode well for our current political situation in the US.
Here's a little game that pop historian Mike Duncan released a little while ago. See if you can figure out the political moves you have to make to pull the Roman Republic back from the brink: https://www.riddle.com/showcase/165065/narrative
Let's not forget that Rome was broke when it met its demise, having debased its currency as tax revenues declined, and after taxing land owners to the point that additional revenue was unavailable and - anecdotally at least - some land owners sold themselves into tax-free slavery rather than face the consequences of non-payment.
But I haven’t read the book so I could be talking out of my ass