| ▲ | phtrivier 5 hours ago |
| I'd feel obliged to add some "but, her emails..." reference. But it feels million years away. It's interesting to wonder how you get out of a spiral of incompetence and border-line (to be polite) corrumption at the highest level. Putting those people in charge was quick ; sure, a future administration could put them out quickly enough ; but how long will there be decently skilled people willing to take those positions ? How long until the only ones who want to put their toes in the swamp are those who really enjoy the mud ? Put differently: can a liberal democracy organize a "just" version of a purge ? |
|
| ▲ | pqtyw an hour ago | parent | next [-] |
| > border-line (to be polite) corrumption Hard to imagine what would constitute "full blown corruption" based on this standard? |
|
| ▲ | razakel 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The coup has already happened. |
|
| ▲ | edg5000 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| We'd have to look at the longest-running democracies and observe how they handled periodic refactorings |
| |
| ▲ | kingleopold 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | “A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.” ― Alexander Fraser Tytler | | |
| ▲ | booleandilemma a minute ago | parent | next [-] | | [delayed] | |
| ▲ | xpe an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | "A witty saying proves nothing." ― Voltaire 1767 Tytler's quote is trying to say too much. It might be acceptable as historical commentary, but it carries little weight to me; it seems overly confident about what the future might hold.* Tytler died in 1813. We have learned much since then: much about human nature, institutions, experimentation, statistics, evidence, constructing good theories, and governance.** Sure, the quote is worth some reflection; it has grains of truth, but it should not be given undue weight. * I am not saying "we can predict nothing"! Far from it. I am ok with predictions (even bold ones) to the extent they are deeply rooted in the best understandings and models we have available. ** I'm talking about what motivated people figure out through careful reasoning and evidence, not simply how the median person funnels information from their ears to their mouth. And I'm certainly not commending the effort and thought that the median person puts into stewarding their democracy (if they have one). While we (in the USA, for the time being?) have something like one. | |
| ▲ | mpalmer 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | You know, it's very funny. This is the most reproduced quote from Tytler, and yet you also have these chestnuts: While man is being instigated by the love of power—a passion visible in an infant, and common to us even with the inferior animals—he will seek personal superiority in preference to every matter of a general concern.
The people flatter themselves that they have the sovereign power. These are, in fact, words without meaning. It is true they elected governors; but how are these elections brought about? In every instance of election by the mass of a people—through the influence of those governors themselves, and by means the most opposite to a free and disinterested choice, by the basest corruption and bribery. But those governors once selected, where is the boasted freedom of the people? They must submit to their rule and control, with the same abandonment of their natural liberty, the freedom of their will, and the command of their actions, as if they were under the rule of a monarch.
| |
| ▲ | mpalmer 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The quotee would be surprised to see how little voting is being done by the people receiving the largesse in the last 20 years. Not to mention how little voters had to do with the decisions which caused the deficit to rise the most. The Iraq war, poor handling of COVID, tax cuts for the wealthy. | | |
| ▲ | fn-mote 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > The Iraq war, poor handling of COVID, tax cuts for the wealthy. And now the Iran War, wait for it. | |
| ▲ | xvector an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | 40% of Americans pay nothing in federal income tax | | |
|
| |
| ▲ | alchemism 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Well….they tended to collapse after a couple centuries. |
|
|
| ▲ | zzzeek 28 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Why not look for historical examples? There should be hundreds not to mention the obvious ones? |
|
| ▲ | greenavocado 44 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > can a liberal democracy organize a "just" version of a purge ? Absolutely, it happened before on January 30, 1933 |
|
| ▲ | bergoid 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| >I'd feel obliged to add some "but, her emails..." reference. HRC's secret email server and the leaked Kash Patel emails couldn't be more different. The first one is, in the words of a federal District of Columbia judge: "one of the gravest modern offenses to government transparency". [1] The second one is the malicious leaking of some private emails. These emails are frankly none of our business (unless you are part of Kash Patel's family or friends). [1] https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/07/politics/clinton-emails-l... |
| |
| ▲ | _heimdall 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Not sure why this is being down voted. There is a difference for sure between hosting your own email server and using it for official government communications and having your own personal email address used for personal communications. The issue that seemed to completely disappear related to the use of Signal messenger for official white house communications seems more aligned to the email server issue. It was reported heavily at the time what the reporting requirements were and that they would have to submit the full chat histories within 30 days or something like that to stay within the law. I never heard whether that actually happened or not, the story just died. | | | |
| ▲ | UncleMeat 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Was it equally grave when Colin Powell did the same thing? | | | |
| ▲ | tootie an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | We know for a fact that the current DoD are using private Signal messages for coordinating military action. We know they are constantly using private emails. We are sending the president's son-in-law to negotiate with foreign countries despite not being a government employee and also have massive conflicts of interest. |
|
|
| ▲ | b00ty4breakfast 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| >It's interesting to wonder how you get out of a spiral of incompetence and border-line (to be polite) corrumption at the highest level. you get out when the thing dies because these kinds of organizations always end the same way; competence is usurped by sycophancy and flattery until there's no one left to keep it functioning and it collapses under the weight of it's own bullshit. hopefully, there will be something to salvage but the longer these folks are in charge the bigger the splash will be when they finally bottom out |
|
| ▲ | hillarycliton 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Referencing Hillary’s email would be kinda silly. She self hosted the email account she used for official government business. It was loaded with classified information. This guy, while incompetent, had his personal email hacked. Important distinction. |
| |
| ▲ | eszed an hour ago | parent [-] | | You are correct. On the other hand, Patel's emails "appear to show a mix of personal and work correspondence". We already know that people in government - this isn't a partisan point: folks of all factions do it - use private communication channels to discuss "official business" specifically to avoid mandated disclosure and archival requirements. If (and I emphasize "if", because we don't yet know if this was the case), if Patel was doing that, and especially if he was sharing / discussing classified material, then the facts of the case would bump right up against what Clinton and Powell did. |
|
|
| ▲ | cagenut 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| honestly, look internally. after the plane from qatar. after the son-in-law's real estate dealings. after the visible-to-everyone kalshi and oil futures bets frontrunning the administrations announcements. for you to still feel the need to frame things as "border-line (to be polite)" is, in and of itself, the perfect example of the overall problem. take your inability to draw a clear-as-day conclusion and state it plainly and multiply it by another ~50M "centrists" who continue to believe that staying "not political" and "avoiding the news" is a viable strategy to just wait the problem out. until the checked out cowards realize that strategy isn't going to work, things will continue to get worse. "no politics" might as as well be the second maga slogan. |
| |
| ▲ | miki123211 an hour ago | parent [-] | | "no politics" is the immune response to the social-media-fueled, conspiracy-theory-driven "we are the good guys, you basically deserve to die" craze. Both sides are culpable here. In the US, both parties were literally claiming that the elections were stolen (Republicans in 2020, Democrats with the since-debunked 2016 Cambridge Analytica scandal). Other countries had different issues, but the shape of the problem was basically the same everywhere. If you keep being called bad words for years for no reason, seeing your side do the exact same thing, no surprise you tune out. | | |
| ▲ | craftkiller an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | I'd say the bigger issue in 2016 was the Russian interference, which has been proven and has lead to convictions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_interference_in_the_20... > Simultaneously, the Republican-led Senate and House Intelligence Committees conducted their own investigations into the Russians' activities. The Senate committee's report, released in five volumes between July 2019 and August 2020, found that the Russian government had engaged in an "extensive campaign" to sabotage the election in favor of Trump I'm also curious how you think Cambridge Analytica was debunked. I don't see any mention of debunking on their wikipedia page, but I do see facebook being fined billions for it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Ana... | |
| ▲ | whoiskevin an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | "Both sides" is the biggest cop out of the last decade. | |
| ▲ | ses1984 an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | How was Cambridge analytica debunked? |
|
|