Congress is supposed to be a check on that power. However, because of the systematic corruption of money, Congress is full of compliant and easily bought politicians, though, thus leaving few that would actually have the willingness to fight a despot.
America’s system of checks and balances might struggle to contain a despot
21–30 of 60 posts
Re: America’s system of checks and balances might struggle to contain a despot
#22Could someone tell me more about the American Enterprise Institute? They critique "Trump's executive-orders" situation, which a lot of organizations could do but they ended up in the Economist. They basically enter the picture like "we're an authority and we're saying stuff is bad, like we have an actual code for how bad it almost is". They're a conservative think-tank, they seem to have intelligence/military ties, s…
Agree that this doesn't warrant flagging. Thanks for re-posting. As an American who regularly travels within and beyond our borders, I've developed similar feelings about the protocol for security checks in the US. Getting the full-body patdown is awkward, taking off jackets, belts, shoes, etc. and then putting them back on in front of a throng of people borders on humiliating for someone with anxiety issues.
Re: America’s system of checks and balances might struggle to contain a despot
#23The power of the Presidency has been slowly expanded over the last few centuries. Each time, when the power was expanded, it was done so under a President who seemed reasonable enough that nobody was afraid of what the change truly meant. They knew that their current President wouldn't abuse it, and they didn't think much further ahead than that. Many of these expansions of power were made for very short-term political gain that seems downright silly in retrospect.
Trump should be a lesson that reverberates throughout future history on why we should always be wary of expanding the Presidency's power. There will come along a President every once in a while who will abuse every drop of power given to him and who will basically act like he's in an episode of Game of Thrones. The government should be designed to work fairly even with such a person in power.
Re: America’s system of checks and balances might struggle to contain a despot
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're not being downvoted on content, and downvotes are not disagreements. That's not a good HN comment; there's no constructive response to be made to that comment. In particular, from the guidelines: > Please avoid introducing classic flamewar topics unless you have something genuinely new to say about them. I would say that politics is the classic flamewar topic. And your comment certainly didn't add anything new…
Actually, on HN, downvoting can represent disagreement. Usually, flagging is for abuse.
It can also represent disagreement with atomically small HN posts. shrugs In this case I highly doubt most HN commenters support Trump, because he already has majority disapproval. Most normal republicans aren't super fond of tax hikes, even if they are done indirectly.
Re: America’s system of checks and balances might struggle to contain a despot
#25Bruce Ackerman, whose work was cited in the article, gave a dead-on analysis of the current situation in 2011:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7lCgKfxmuQ
He appears to be discussing certain points in his book, The Decline and Fall of the American Republic. Here are a few:
- The rise of a dual-election system for president increases the likelihood of an extremist president. Imagine a political spectrum ranging from 1 to 100. In a single election, the winning candidate appeals to the fat 50 range. In a dual-election primary system the winning candidate appeals to the fat extremes of 25 and 75.
- The decline of the press leaves an information vacuum which political media manipulators fill to the president's advantage
- The constant rat-tat-tat of the War on X (where X is drugs and terror) gives a sense of urgency that only unilateral presidential action can address.
- The rise of the military as a check (or aid) to presidential power (think Turkey).
- Cabinet-level departments are increasingly influenced or controlled by non-confirmed staffers (e.g., Elizabeth Warren), removing an important check on presidential power.
- The lack of a "Leader of the Opposition" position in the American system leaves the job of braking presidential power to a diffuse Congress.
- The rise of polls as de facto privatized elections that legitimize the administration's agenda ("polls show the majority of Americans favor the President's actions").
Ackerman also notes the key role the Obama administration played in advancing these trends. This is not a question of parties, but of institutions.
Re: America’s system of checks and balances might struggle to contain a despot
#26David Frum recently wrote a piece for the Atlantic outlining the likelihood of a "backsliding democracy" in the United States. I found it chilling:
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/03/how-to-...
Re: America’s system of checks and balances might struggle to contain a despot
#27We deserve Trump. We deserve every fucked up thing that happens. We deserve this because we did heed the warnings, we did not stop expansion of powers, we were complacent. It's too late to be angry now.
Re: America’s system of checks and balances might struggle to contain a despot
#28Could someone tell me more about the American Enterprise Institute? They critique "Trump's executive-orders" situation, which a lot of organizations could do but they ended up in the Economist. They basically enter the picture like "we're an authority and we're saying stuff is bad, like we have an actual code for how bad it almost is". They're a conservative think-tank, they seem to have intelligence/military ties, s…
Agree that this doesn't warrant flagging. Thanks for re-posting. As an American who regularly travels within and beyond our borders, I've developed similar feelings about the protocol for security checks in the US. Getting the full-body patdown is awkward, taking off jackets, belts, shoes, etc. and then putting them back on in front of a throng of people borders on humiliating for someone with anxiety issues.
I lost a pair of boots on the way to a meeting on an internal flight in the US. It really can get quite crazy. (And no, steel tipped boots are not weapons but a safety device and are very common in rural areas).
You could argue about my dress sense, but to confiscate my boots is just nuts.
Re: America’s system of checks and balances might struggle to contain a despot
#29plz stop, gop.
We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13550846 and marked it off-topic.
Re: America’s system of checks and balances might struggle to contain a despot
#30Might? They've been struggling since the Bush Administration ushered forth an era of warrantless wiretaps and black sites. My biggest criticism of Obama has always been his lax attitude towards the War in Terror infrastructure: NSA mass surveillance; drone strikes against American citizens in countries we are not at war with; the unaccountable FISA court, to name a few. Obama gave his successor a loaded gun. I was un…
And that is exactly the reason why all these 'I've got nothing to hide' types are so wrong, you never know what the next government will be like and all that data is just one small step away from being subpoenaed and abused, if it hasn't found its way to a government owned server already.