Remix.run Logo
Lendal a day ago

If a rival political party takes power in 2029 and they decide to do nothing about this, are they complicit?

If the cops drive past a mugging, observe, and then drive on past allowing the law to go unenforced, are they not just as corrupt as the robbers?

s_dev a day ago | parent | next [-]

Was the Union army complicit in the crimes of the Confederacy by simply allowing them to drop their arms and walk away as well? The world is complicated and full of nuanced takes depending on context. That said:

>If a rival political party takes power in 2029 and they decide to do nothing about this, are they complicit?

Like this really does read as: I still blame the Democrats for the crimes of the Republicans.

The ultimate authority here is the US voters and they have chosen poorly again and again. They are complicit for sure as they chose both to empower Republicans and tie the hands of the Democrats with impossible standards.

twister2920 a day ago | parent | next [-]

> Was the Union army complicit in the crimes of the Confederacy by simply allowing them to drop their arms and walk away as well?

yes, they were. the USA if the Unionists has followed through on reconstruction looks like a utopia compared to now

JeremyNT 21 hours ago | parent [-]

It's stuff like this that really makes me wonder about the great man theory of history.

Without JW Booth, maybe Lincoln would've broken the southern white aristocracy, and maybe Reconstruction would've succeeded. One man could've made the difference and finished the job.

Likewise, it's difficult to imagine any other con man so skilled and beloved (by a certain subset of the population) as Trump, and his singular abilities and predilections have potentially derailed the entire project of American empire - maybe permanently.

twister2920 19 hours ago | parent [-]

Reconstruction ended more than 10 years after Lincoln's assassination, he would not have remained in office forever. I think for most Unionists the war was not about abolition or racial equality and there simply was not the political will to make the changes necessary to prevent Jim Crow in the south.

nemothekid a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>Was the Union army complicit in the crimes of the Confederacy by simply allowing them to drop their arms and walk away as well? The world is complicated and full of nuanced takes depending on context.

I think the irony here is you are presenting this like a complicated choice, when I would argue many people agree that the way the Union handled reconstruction was extremely poor.

ComputerGuru a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

We are still paying the price for that today, some of us a lot more than others. It was well-intentioned but with hindsight being what it is, historians pretty much agree that it was the cause of a lot of the problems we fight with today.

datsci_est_2015 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It’s funny you bring up Union vs Confederacy, because Reconstruction should be a blueprint of what not to do. We’re still paying today for the failures of our forefathers to not have the bravery to stamp out the worst cultural elements of the Confederacy, let alone the extended century-long suffering of formerly enslaved peoples in what ranged from “separate but equal” to outright apartheid.

So yes, it was very much the Union’s fault for not properly cutting the many heads of the hydra with great prejudice.

Edit: the Nuremberg trials are a fantastic blueprint for what to do, though. And that’s what was missing after the Civil War. The sentences handed out at Nuremberg aren’t necessarily relevant to the crimes committed by those in power today, but the cultural shift that materialized in Germany post-war is the type of cultural shift needed to counteract the damage of the current administration: against corruption, grift, and executive overreach.

antisthenes a day ago | parent [-]

> the Nuremberg trials are a fantastic blueprint for what to do, though.

Some would argue that the Nuremberg trials did not go nearly far enough, as there should also have been similar trials in all countries that collaborated with that regime during the course of the war.

That's why you see far-right parties nowadays spring up again and start to grain more influence. It could have been stomped out well enough.

datsci_est_2015 a day ago | parent [-]

I agree, much of the Balkan suffering from the latter half of the 20th century could have been curtailed by properly stamping out ultranationalist groups as a punishment for their ethnic cleansing. The Ustaše, for example.

BryantD a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes. That’s a great historical precedent — Reconstruction was a hotly debated topic and the more radical forms would have banned former Confederate soldiers for voting, for example. Many Southern states had military governors imposed by the Federal government.

Andrew Johnson pardoned almost all Confederate leaders, didn’t care about freeing slaves, and is one of the worst Presidents in history.

rf15 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Doesn't that still feel shortsighted? The way you speak, you cannot even imagine a world without a political landscape that is Republican vs Democrats. I think both parties have shown time and time again that they cannot be trusted steering the country.

Yes, that probably means that the US has to utterly break in its political system before it can get any better, considering that the current election process favours a two-party stalemate (or one party controlling everything)

arjie a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There’s no tool for them to do it with and I prefer that that remain the case. I would prefer that we take the pardon away from the President and certainly think the pre-emptive pardon is unacceptable but there is no mechanism to pursue the present government.

I’d prefer if the US doesn’t become like my native India where the previous government goes in jail when a new government takes power. Hopefully we just destroy the pardon and call the obvious self-enrichment here an abuse of government that we cannot fix with our devices and go forward.

wildrhythms a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes

threatofrain a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

A robber isn't corrupt. A robber betrays no principle except to seize when hungry, and a robber has no institution to corrupt.

testing22321 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The Police in the US have no legal requirement to help you. They are perfectly allowed to sit and do nothing while a gun man kills kids in a school.

This is well established in law.

https://nypost.com/2013/01/27/city-says-cops-had-no-duty-to-...

lotsofpulp a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Rival party is not equivalent to the cops.

Even if the rival party were to somehow control all 3 branches of government (which they will not), the voting records show a full 1/3 of American adults outright support this corruption (many of the cops themselves), and another 1/3 are willing to ignore it.

If you are in the 1/3 that does care about it, you are not going to have a good time trying to fight the other 1/3, many of whom make up the “law and order” department.

So the answer to both questions is a resounding no, because the world is more complicated than a comic book superhero movie.

llm_nerd a day ago | parent | prev [-]

This is such an amazing take because it is a constant in US politics. Like how in the world did you think it appropriate to pivot like this?

The standards for the Democrats are impossible perfection, regardless of the challenges.

The standards for the Republicans is...there are literally zero standards. Thieves, grifters, rapists, pedos, just the absolute worst human garbage imaginable, and somehow Americans convince themselves that if the Democrats don't (usually because they can't) do anything about it, clearly the Dems are the real problem, so it's time to vote Republicans. Just bizarre stuff.

I could give infinite examples where the slightest thing is a massive story about Democrat action or inaction, while every day is a new low in what the shit-pile that the modern Republican party gets away with. Benghazi is still constantly cited by the right, while Trump...Jesus Christ, every day is a thousand times worse. Astonishing levels of corruption and stupidity is just another Tuesday now.

It's amazing. Every framing somehow shifts like this.

swed420 a day ago | parent | next [-]

> The standards for the Democrats are impossible perfection

How do you figure? The previous Dem president literally promised, "nothing will fundamentally change" and that's exactly what happened.

We have a faux democracy / uniparty of capital interests where one "side" manufactures consent for the other.

rightwardRatchet++;

llm_nerd a day ago | parent [-]

> How do you figure?

Biden was speaking to the people who ended up bankrolling Trump when threatened with slightly increased taxes, and who are going to dump billions into the midterms. When you're in a country that wavers around 50/50 every election (even when the choice is between competent government or a spectacularly incompetent shitshow of grifters, pedos and thieves), yes, there are limits to what you can realistically do in one election cycle.

In any case, it's actually hilarious that rhetoric like this "oh well actually the Dems are to blame because they haven't stopped them yet" is precisely why Republicans are gung ho in fighting against ranked choice ballots. A secret they've learned is to field some fringe bullshit candidates like Tulsi Gabbard, RFK Jr, Kanye, and so on, and they need the sort of idiots that vote for idiots like that to be throwing away their votes because "it's a uniparty of capital". Ranked choice ballots -- real democracy -- would threaten that.

https://www.adn.com/politics/2026/08/07/worlds-wealthiest-ma...

Trump has repeatedly claimed ranked choice ballots are "corrupt", and House Republicans have repeatedly tried to ban it. Do you want to know why? Protip - it's because they rely on incredibly stupid voters.

a day ago | parent | next [-]
[deleted]
swed420 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Is that why Dems elevated Trump originally from meme-tier gameshow host to serious contender with their pied piper "strategy"? The best they could do is be mad at wikileaks for making them look bad.

Or why they forced a widely unpopular Dem candidate instead of having an actual primary last time around (not that they've shown they can even run a fair primary)?

edit to add:

> Ranked choice ballots -- real democracy -- would threaten that.

This is not the magical fix you think it is, since other countries with >2 parties suffer from the same systemic rot of revolving door politics, monopolistic corporate media, etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolving_door_(politics)

llm_nerd a day ago | parent [-]

100%. Clearly you've nailed it, and you should vote for Trump's third term.

Let's be real here - when people do the "both parties are the same", usually citing some chickenshit bullshit like you just did, they're almost always a terrible person who just loves Trump but won't just admit it.

Just own it, man.

swed420 a day ago | parent [-]

Way to address actual criticisms.

Also, it's a strawman of your creation to say both parties are the same. They're two different facades for the same underlying monetary interests. Sorry you're so easily fooled by that, but it shows that it works.

llm_nerd a day ago | parent [-]

> We have a faux democracy / uniparty of capital interests where one "side" manufactures consent for the other.

That's your quote. Strawman? Not really, friend.

Do you know what the prefix uni- means? Let me quote Google for you-

"The prefix uni- means "one," "single," or "having only one." It comes from the Latin word unus"

I mean, you literally just blamed the Dems for Trump, which is simply amazing stuff. The reaching...don't your arms hurt?

swed420 a day ago | parent [-]

Nowhere does that say same, like you're trying to force.

It makes sense you'd resist and twist what I'm saying, because it means people like you are literally part of the problem.

Since you edited your post, I'll respond:

> "The prefix uni- means "one," "single," or "having only one." It comes from the Latin word unus"

They are still undeniably two separate parties that both inherit the most important traits from the root problem of dominating capital interests.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniparty

> Uniparty is a political term referring to the idea that seemingly separate political parties, typically the two dominant parties in a liberal democracy, function in practice as a single entity. It is often applied to the Republican Party and the Democratic Party in the United States, or to the Conservative Party and the Labour Party in the United Kingdom.[1] The concept implies that despite their outward disagreements, the parties collaborate behind closed doors and share a unified set of political and economic interests, effectively creating a de facto one-party state. Proponents of this idea argue that such a "uniparty" suppresses genuine political alternatives and dissenting viewpoints by exercising control over the media, grassroots organisations, and ballot access regulations.[2]

HumblyTossed a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The standards for the Democrats are impossible perfection

No, the standard for Dems is "don't rock the boat". The Right moves things further to the right, the Dems don't let them go back to the left.

lotsofpulp a day ago | parent [-]

How are they supposed to do that while being outnumbered in Congress?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_divisions_of_United_Stat...

Note that Repubs have a more solid group than Dems in the Senate, because Dems have to win states with more compromising candidates like Sinema/Manchin/Lieberman/Fetterman/etc, whereas the Repub states are solidly Republican.

Just see how Repubs were able to stymie Democrat Supreme Court Justices, and how many they were able to install.

listless a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Thieves, grifters, rapists, pedos, just the absolute worst human garbage imaginable.

I would urge you strongly not to let yourself be this consumed by this kind of thinking. This is a distorted view of your fellow man - however accurate _some_ of it may be about _some_ people - regardless of their political affiliation. This kind of thinking is exactly how we got to where we are now and persisting in it will almost certainly get us more extreme reactions.

that said, the Republican establishment has proven itself unworthy of the office and should be shown the door in the next election cycle - in decimating fashion. So much so that it should cause a complete recalibration of that party.

lotsofpulp a day ago | parent [-]

>This kind of thinking is exactly how we got to where we are now and persisting in it will almost certainly get us more extreme reactions.

It was seeing a black guy, and then possibly a woman, and then possibly a black woman get to the top that got us where we are now. The message is clear, don’t disrupt up our image of the hierarchy, or else we will support the worst of the worst, as long as they maintain the order.

newfriend a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The fact that this comment hasn't been flagged goes to show how ridiculous hn has become. I know we are not supposed to say "hn has become reddit", but hn has become reddit.

llm_nerd a day ago | parent [-]

The guy with 5 karma after 8 years has thoughts about the problems with HN. Amazing.

My comment is undeniable fact. That it offends some people like you is not something you have the right to be protected from.

newfriend 19 hours ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

llm_nerd 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Firstly, the upvote please nonsense betrays that you really don't know HN. I post these comments knowing that they're going to get downvoted, and I'm perfectly fine with that given that I'm not a snowflake. HN abhors political discussions, which is why these sorts of submissions usually get flagged off the front page quickly.

Secondly, if by Republicans you're referring specifically to the Trump abomination that has completely perverted the Republican party into a grifting party of unbelievable stupidity, extraordinary levels of racism, and self-destruction while the country is being looted in the open, yes, that's true. Republicans bad. I mean, it used to be the party of sober competence and steadfast steering, now it's a fucking joke (and one where the only fans left are the really, really bad people). If this offends you, too bad, the observation is utterly true.

RicoElectrico a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Same in Poland, sadly. Conservatives or rather "conservatives" can get away with way more...