Let us hope that good magistrates prevail in the coming year and a half. It seems that America’s judicial system is riven by corruption at its very top and if it provides justice it moves at a glacial pace. Moreover, it seems to met out justice unevenly depending of wealth, social capital, and skin color which does not bode well for the task set at hand regarding the former occupant of the White House.
Historically, tyranny does not come from the judicial system. Let’s hope it stays that way. Let’s hope that the judicial system does not aid and abet executive tyranny :-) Have you heard of the No-Labels movement? It’s a risky proposition regarding a third party presidential candidate, but unprecedented times call for unprecedented political innovation.
The “No Labels” movement is of course a terrible idea for the Left and great for the Right. The Left is a fracturous coalition, the Right at this point has gone through the crucible of Trump and now only represents anti-democratic and racist tendencies - it will not lose many votes to a No Labels style candidate. I wouldn’t be surprised to find vast amounts of RW dark money subtlety propping up a No Label candidate to peal away the Youth vote.
Interesting. I totally agree with you on this one that a third-party is a dicey thing. This group has promised that they aim to defeat Trump and also in the event that the numbers seem to be indicating they are “spoiling“ in favor of Trump, they will withdraw and promote Biden. We do need to shake the hell out of our current two-party system, hopefully forging a better future. I plead ignorance on this one because it’s all about predicting the future. Nothing is more impossible, leaving me often to simply promote. “Do the right thing.“ 👊
Well, withdrawing so as not to spoil Biden's chances is a difficult thing to do. Remember how pissed off Bernie Sanders supporters were in 2016. Something like 12% voted for Trump. It is hard to reign in passion once you have it started. I think it would be better not to have this effort. Also, I don't see a Republican-lite party splitting off of the current GOP - if it hasn't gained traction and thrived under Trump how will it do anything in its much diminished state now?
I would argue that tyranny has already been most effective subverting the judiciary. Bush vs Gore giving W his SCOTUS picks (subverting the vote count in FL on party lines), followed by Obama not being allowed to make a pick, followed by vote loser Trump appointing his two picks. The SCOTUS is illegitimate in my view simply based on the appointment process. Now with its Christo-fascist view it will weigh in on all manner of cases - but most importantly on gerrymandering, and the power of states to set election rules regardless of their fairness. Tyranny has come for the judiciary and it has been 25 years in coming. Honesty, what is going on with corrupt Thomas and his traitorous J6 wife is just window dressing on the abomination that is the current Supreme Court.
I hear you, Angus. But now I’m going to say something you might well deplore. It is that no matter how corrupt and compromised you might think the SC is, we must accept the rulings of the body and abide them as the legitimate final word on law. We can constitutionally protest, legislate, and otherwise strategize, but those rulings must be viewed as “legitimate.” If not, if you or anyone else propagandize that the Supreme Court is illegitimate, you will be actively contributing to the risk of civil war in the event of a repeat of something like the court’s determination in the narrow Bush Gore election of 2000. The rule of law, if we respect it even when we disagree with it, is the only way to resolve what otherwise becomes bloody mayhem. Here’s a speech by Lincoln in 1838 that robustly backs up my argument: https://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/lyceum.htm
Also, I might add that 4 in 10 Republicans say political violence may be necessary. The threat is not from the Left saying the Supreme Court is illegitimate! The Right will always cry out for "respecting" institutions they control while decrying the Left. Just look at what happened in the State House in Tennessee and Montana as minorities bring their grievances and represent their constituents. They will use the system and pretend to respect it when it is to their advantage as in State Houses with Super Majorities, but the moment a Democrat gains power, like in Wisconsin, they strip the executive of his powers. Or the moment a progressive effort is achieved through a state referendum, they either try to raise the threshold for passage to 66% or they over-write the effort in the legislature.
That's hogwash IMHO. We have a political system that provides grossly uneven rewards to its citizens - high inequality, lack of access to healthcare, lack of mobility and access to education, a policing and judicial system designed to keep people of color down while offering huge advantages and subsidies to the favoured groups - high-income earners, fossil fuels, big Ag etc. The American political system never yields to progress unless it perceives a threat to its very existence. Do you think trust-busting by Teddy Roosevelt would have happened without the threat of unionists, anarchists and communists? Do you think FDR would have gotten away with the transfer of wealth in his Alphabet agencies without the depression? Or would we have had civil rights progress without race riots and mass disobedience? Meekly waiting is a fool's game, as is accepting the current rulings of the Supreme Court made by right-wing religious ideologues. Over 50% of the citizenry disapprove of the Supreme Court - and the reason is simple - it is thwarting the popular will on reproductive rights, gun ownership, voting rights, police accountability, climate change, college affordability, LGBT rights, etc etc. The Supreme Court is now blocking progress on any legislative or administrative effort that is seen as progressive. It will, at the same time, dismantle the administrative state and its regulations and let all hell break loose in the States as they react in glee with an orgy of hate and pollution. I'm sorry, much as I understand the institutionalist perspective, it is only Democrats who do, the GOP has been dismantling America's institutions, ignoring their written and unwritten rules, and winning while the Left says the equivalent of "tut tut, bad form". I won't serve on any court in this land where the ultimate arbiter of justice is a couple of sexual predators, a former member of a Catholic cult, and people on the take from parties in front of their court. How could I give this court legitimacy, it has none?
👍🏼 wrong and misguided warranting protests to force change is great! That’s the way—even civil disobedience. That is entirely different from declaring the SC “ILLEGIMATE!” Is our democracy “ILLEGIMITATE”—-arbitrary? If so, revolution is the only answer. So says John Locke, etc. Back up your declarations with what action?
BLM , and before it, Occupy Wall Street, were both attempts to achieve the change we need peacefully (Yes, they were largely peaceful movements), and both were put down with considerable violence by the police and RW paramilitary groups. There is a pattern here. The next time around will be considerably more dangerous as the right wing in this country sees violence as legitimate. In fact, that is the case as we see new laws that allow you to "stand your ground" and kill black people or their allies when you are frightened and where people who drive their cars through protestors are pardoned. The social contract is fraying, and there is no pressure valve - every effort at change is met with violence and political suppression.
Also, the Senate imbalance will only worsen as the population concentrates in a small number of large coastal states, and the center of the country hollows out, and as young, minority voters flock to major urban areas - these are demographic changes that are not driven by political parties but are acting to diminish and disenfranchise the Democratic vote.
I would argue that our democracy is one of the least legitimate in the OECD. In the 1990s, the US had the lowest voter participation of the whole lot! Things have improved somewhat since then; fortunately now we are in the bottom 25%, partly because of backsliding elsewhere! We have a new Jim Crow 2.0 system, which stops students from voting (no student IDs please), the poor from voting (where is your driving license?), and minorities (no pews to the polls anymore). Meanwhile, there are plenty of polling stations open in white areas that will take any ID that is for old people - what a surprise. Basically, the GOP has decided that since they can't win on policy, they will win by suppressing the other side's voters. This is all on top of a ridiculous political apparatus, largely enshrined in the Constitution, that more or less gives the Senate to a bunch of tiny agricultural states that represent 45% of the population, an Electoral College that allows the vote loser to "win", and gerrymanders that historically have eliminated 20-30 Democratic seats. So I would give our Democracy a C-. As for revolution, I would ask do you see a legitimate political path (under the current SCOTUS and Senate filibuster) for righting our political system? I certainly don't.
I like this: "So I would give our Democracy a C-."
My solution to the problems at hand are to stand for ethical constitutional democracy, push for ethical constitutional democracy, including sidelining demagogues on both sides, and hope for the best. What else is there, except for wailing? If there is the successful installation of arbitrary government––like Trump attempted and failed to accomplish in Jan. 2021––we will have to try diplomacy and international intervention for some months, perhaps years, but if that fails, all that remains is submission to tyranny, revolution against arbitrary government, or flight from the country? Which of these three pathways will you choose, Angus, if it comes to the installation of arbitrary government? (Please do not say the government is already arbitrary; I mean REAL arbitrary government, as it was defined by John Locke).
Let us hope that good magistrates prevail in the coming year and a half. It seems that America’s judicial system is riven by corruption at its very top and if it provides justice it moves at a glacial pace. Moreover, it seems to met out justice unevenly depending of wealth, social capital, and skin color which does not bode well for the task set at hand regarding the former occupant of the White House.
Historically, tyranny does not come from the judicial system. Let’s hope it stays that way. Let’s hope that the judicial system does not aid and abet executive tyranny :-) Have you heard of the No-Labels movement? It’s a risky proposition regarding a third party presidential candidate, but unprecedented times call for unprecedented political innovation.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Labels
The “No Labels” movement is of course a terrible idea for the Left and great for the Right. The Left is a fracturous coalition, the Right at this point has gone through the crucible of Trump and now only represents anti-democratic and racist tendencies - it will not lose many votes to a No Labels style candidate. I wouldn’t be surprised to find vast amounts of RW dark money subtlety propping up a No Label candidate to peal away the Youth vote.
Interesting. I totally agree with you on this one that a third-party is a dicey thing. This group has promised that they aim to defeat Trump and also in the event that the numbers seem to be indicating they are “spoiling“ in favor of Trump, they will withdraw and promote Biden. We do need to shake the hell out of our current two-party system, hopefully forging a better future. I plead ignorance on this one because it’s all about predicting the future. Nothing is more impossible, leaving me often to simply promote. “Do the right thing.“ 👊
Well, withdrawing so as not to spoil Biden's chances is a difficult thing to do. Remember how pissed off Bernie Sanders supporters were in 2016. Something like 12% voted for Trump. It is hard to reign in passion once you have it started. I think it would be better not to have this effort. Also, I don't see a Republican-lite party splitting off of the current GOP - if it hasn't gained traction and thrived under Trump how will it do anything in its much diminished state now?
I would argue that tyranny has already been most effective subverting the judiciary. Bush vs Gore giving W his SCOTUS picks (subverting the vote count in FL on party lines), followed by Obama not being allowed to make a pick, followed by vote loser Trump appointing his two picks. The SCOTUS is illegitimate in my view simply based on the appointment process. Now with its Christo-fascist view it will weigh in on all manner of cases - but most importantly on gerrymandering, and the power of states to set election rules regardless of their fairness. Tyranny has come for the judiciary and it has been 25 years in coming. Honesty, what is going on with corrupt Thomas and his traitorous J6 wife is just window dressing on the abomination that is the current Supreme Court.
I hear you, Angus. But now I’m going to say something you might well deplore. It is that no matter how corrupt and compromised you might think the SC is, we must accept the rulings of the body and abide them as the legitimate final word on law. We can constitutionally protest, legislate, and otherwise strategize, but those rulings must be viewed as “legitimate.” If not, if you or anyone else propagandize that the Supreme Court is illegitimate, you will be actively contributing to the risk of civil war in the event of a repeat of something like the court’s determination in the narrow Bush Gore election of 2000. The rule of law, if we respect it even when we disagree with it, is the only way to resolve what otherwise becomes bloody mayhem. Here’s a speech by Lincoln in 1838 that robustly backs up my argument: https://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/lyceum.htm
Also, I might add that 4 in 10 Republicans say political violence may be necessary. The threat is not from the Left saying the Supreme Court is illegitimate! The Right will always cry out for "respecting" institutions they control while decrying the Left. Just look at what happened in the State House in Tennessee and Montana as minorities bring their grievances and represent their constituents. They will use the system and pretend to respect it when it is to their advantage as in State Houses with Super Majorities, but the moment a Democrat gains power, like in Wisconsin, they strip the executive of his powers. Or the moment a progressive effort is achieved through a state referendum, they either try to raise the threshold for passage to 66% or they over-write the effort in the legislature.
That's hogwash IMHO. We have a political system that provides grossly uneven rewards to its citizens - high inequality, lack of access to healthcare, lack of mobility and access to education, a policing and judicial system designed to keep people of color down while offering huge advantages and subsidies to the favoured groups - high-income earners, fossil fuels, big Ag etc. The American political system never yields to progress unless it perceives a threat to its very existence. Do you think trust-busting by Teddy Roosevelt would have happened without the threat of unionists, anarchists and communists? Do you think FDR would have gotten away with the transfer of wealth in his Alphabet agencies without the depression? Or would we have had civil rights progress without race riots and mass disobedience? Meekly waiting is a fool's game, as is accepting the current rulings of the Supreme Court made by right-wing religious ideologues. Over 50% of the citizenry disapprove of the Supreme Court - and the reason is simple - it is thwarting the popular will on reproductive rights, gun ownership, voting rights, police accountability, climate change, college affordability, LGBT rights, etc etc. The Supreme Court is now blocking progress on any legislative or administrative effort that is seen as progressive. It will, at the same time, dismantle the administrative state and its regulations and let all hell break loose in the States as they react in glee with an orgy of hate and pollution. I'm sorry, much as I understand the institutionalist perspective, it is only Democrats who do, the GOP has been dismantling America's institutions, ignoring their written and unwritten rules, and winning while the Left says the equivalent of "tut tut, bad form". I won't serve on any court in this land where the ultimate arbiter of justice is a couple of sexual predators, a former member of a Catholic cult, and people on the take from parties in front of their court. How could I give this court legitimacy, it has none?
👍🏼 wrong and misguided warranting protests to force change is great! That’s the way—even civil disobedience. That is entirely different from declaring the SC “ILLEGIMATE!” Is our democracy “ILLEGIMITATE”—-arbitrary? If so, revolution is the only answer. So says John Locke, etc. Back up your declarations with what action?
BLM , and before it, Occupy Wall Street, were both attempts to achieve the change we need peacefully (Yes, they were largely peaceful movements), and both were put down with considerable violence by the police and RW paramilitary groups. There is a pattern here. The next time around will be considerably more dangerous as the right wing in this country sees violence as legitimate. In fact, that is the case as we see new laws that allow you to "stand your ground" and kill black people or their allies when you are frightened and where people who drive their cars through protestors are pardoned. The social contract is fraying, and there is no pressure valve - every effort at change is met with violence and political suppression.
Also, the Senate imbalance will only worsen as the population concentrates in a small number of large coastal states, and the center of the country hollows out, and as young, minority voters flock to major urban areas - these are demographic changes that are not driven by political parties but are acting to diminish and disenfranchise the Democratic vote.
I would argue that our democracy is one of the least legitimate in the OECD. In the 1990s, the US had the lowest voter participation of the whole lot! Things have improved somewhat since then; fortunately now we are in the bottom 25%, partly because of backsliding elsewhere! We have a new Jim Crow 2.0 system, which stops students from voting (no student IDs please), the poor from voting (where is your driving license?), and minorities (no pews to the polls anymore). Meanwhile, there are plenty of polling stations open in white areas that will take any ID that is for old people - what a surprise. Basically, the GOP has decided that since they can't win on policy, they will win by suppressing the other side's voters. This is all on top of a ridiculous political apparatus, largely enshrined in the Constitution, that more or less gives the Senate to a bunch of tiny agricultural states that represent 45% of the population, an Electoral College that allows the vote loser to "win", and gerrymanders that historically have eliminated 20-30 Democratic seats. So I would give our Democracy a C-. As for revolution, I would ask do you see a legitimate political path (under the current SCOTUS and Senate filibuster) for righting our political system? I certainly don't.
I like this: "So I would give our Democracy a C-."
My solution to the problems at hand are to stand for ethical constitutional democracy, push for ethical constitutional democracy, including sidelining demagogues on both sides, and hope for the best. What else is there, except for wailing? If there is the successful installation of arbitrary government––like Trump attempted and failed to accomplish in Jan. 2021––we will have to try diplomacy and international intervention for some months, perhaps years, but if that fails, all that remains is submission to tyranny, revolution against arbitrary government, or flight from the country? Which of these three pathways will you choose, Angus, if it comes to the installation of arbitrary government? (Please do not say the government is already arbitrary; I mean REAL arbitrary government, as it was defined by John Locke).