3 ms·

If the processes stink, the correct answer is not enforced ignorance, it is reform. How can we reform without knowledge?

cormacrelf 5y ago
Judicial review of executive actions like these and its mechanisms of enforcement do not stink, rather they are one of the greatest achievements of human civilisation and arguably function better than literally every other part of society in any democracy you care to name. They do not need reform. If they needed reform beyond small calibrations of penalty units, the correct answer would more likely be a civil war.
- dannyw 5y ago
  I don't agree with your position that regular people shouldn't know about cases where rule of law failed, because it might make them question the rule of law. A strong and resilient democracy is built on transparency, not on hiding information. Anything that people put resistance towards public disclosure is always a strong smell; not dissimilar to this township refusing to swear in an independent auditor.
  - cormacrelf 5y ago
    It’s a fine distinction. I didn’t say people shouldn’t know. I said we shouldn’t talk about it so casually in a public forum. The information is available to anyone who wants to know.
    - ttybird2 5y ago
      I learned most of the things that I know without explicitly looking for them. I am glad that this topic came up in this very thread because I would not have learned about Little Rock Nine otherwise.
      - cormacrelf 5y ago
        I am not an American. Maybe neither are you. But I feel compelled to contend with the fact that many Americans are right on the edge of abandoning their democracy. In these circumstances knowledge is not neutral. My aim here was simply to not permit that tiny chunk of non-neutral knowledge to go without context, and I think I have succeeded. Edit, to put this slightly better: there is a huge difference between keeping something a secret and saying “before I teach you this, I think you should learn these things first”. If the first thing you learned about American civics was that it’s all an illusion and anyone can do what they want, the lesson has utterly failed. You’ve not learned any civics at all.
        giantg2 5y ago
        Or you've learned how the system actually works.
        mise_en_place 5y ago
        That’s elitism and is actually an undemocratic ideal. The freedom of ideas is paramount in a Western democracy. And what I was trying to teach others is that the State’s monopoly on violence is what keeps the whole thing running smoothly. For example, the Magna Carta would have meant nothing if it was not backed by the armies of landowning noblemen.

cormacrelf 5y ago

Judicial review of executive actions like these and its mechanisms of enforcement do not stink, rather they are one of the greatest achievements of human civilisation and arguably function better than literally every other part of society in any democracy you care to name. They do not need reform. If they needed reform beyond small calibrations of penalty units, the correct answer would more likely be a civil war.

dannyw 5y ago
I don't agree with your position that regular people shouldn't know about cases where rule of law failed, because it might make them question the rule of law. A strong and resilient democracy is built on transparency, not on hiding information. Anything that people put resistance towards public disclosure is always a strong smell; not dissimilar to this township refusing to swear in an independent auditor.
- cormacrelf 5y ago
  It’s a fine distinction. I didn’t say people shouldn’t know. I said we shouldn’t talk about it so casually in a public forum. The information is available to anyone who wants to know.
  - ttybird2 5y ago
    I learned most of the things that I know without explicitly looking for them. I am glad that this topic came up in this very thread because I would not have learned about Little Rock Nine otherwise.
    - cormacrelf 5y ago
      I am not an American. Maybe neither are you. But I feel compelled to contend with the fact that many Americans are right on the edge of abandoning their democracy. In these circumstances knowledge is not neutral. My aim here was simply to not permit that tiny chunk of non-neutral knowledge to go without context, and I think I have succeeded. Edit, to put this slightly better: there is a huge difference between keeping something a secret and saying “before I teach you this, I think you should learn these things first”. If the first thing you learned about American civics was that it’s all an illusion and anyone can do what they want, the lesson has utterly failed. You’ve not learned any civics at all.
      - giantg2 5y ago
        Or you've learned how the system actually works.
      - mise_en_place 5y ago
        That’s elitism and is actually an undemocratic ideal. The freedom of ideas is paramount in a Western democracy. And what I was trying to teach others is that the State’s monopoly on violence is what keeps the whole thing running smoothly. For example, the Magna Carta would have meant nothing if it was not backed by the armies of landowning noblemen.