5 ms·

A lot of things in the US would change for the better if we installed a new government for ourselves using the techniques we have when we assist or replace fore

A lot of things in the US would change for the better if we installed a new government for ourselves using the techniques we have when we assist or replace foreign governments. There’s a ton of stuff we have and do, including some fundamental stuff (our system of voting, for one) that’s known to be really bad compared to the “state of the art”. But, in part because of some of those bad elements, we only ever get to apply better solutions for others, never ourselves.

supertrope 2y ago
>replace foreign government Like a CIA sponsored military coup? Or aerial bombing?
- BizarroLand 2y ago
  From what I gather in the Federalist Society Papers, the original intent was that we would reinvent our country every 25 years or so, draft a new constitution and incorporate all of the changes that we needed to continue to function with the precept of being a great society, "Of the people, by the people, for the people". However, requiring 100% of states to affirm the new constitution was difficult enough in 1776 when there were only 13 states and they all had a common enemy to band together against. Doing that now would probably be impossible or require antilogic so extreme no human could read it without their ears bleeding from the brain hemorrhage.
  - dragonwriter 2y ago
    > From what I gather in the Federalist Society Papers, the original intent was that we would reinvent our country every 25 years or so I think you are confusing in name the Federalist Papers with the modern and, except in attempt to steal glory, unrelated Federalist Society, and confusing in substance the Federalist Papers with a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to John Adams in which he expressed the conclusion that all laws (incl. Cobstitutions) must, based on then-current actuarial data, sunset in approximately that timeframe to avoid the living being ruled over by the dead.
    - BizarroLand 2y ago
      You're probably right. I was quoting from memory and memory is unreliable. Thanks for the clarification!
  - eszed 2y ago
    Just to be pedantic: constitutional amendments, in the USA, require a maximum of 75% of the states to agree. Minimally 66.6% (repeating, of course) of them to call a constitutional convention, and ratify the results. None of that challenges your important points about the intentions of the founders, nor the difficulties upon which their project has run around.
- vundercind 2y ago
  The “friendlier” nation-building stuff, from being invited to help (as in the original example) to installing new states in countries we’ve conquered (you see now why the quotes on “friendlier”). Less so the coups. Usually with those we just want some degree of fealty or alignment. Dictators are easier to predict and control in that way, and one fuck of a lot cheaper to install than a functioning democracy.
0x5f3759df-i 2y ago
Yep, there’s a reason we didn’t give Germany and Japan our “exceptional” electoral college system. Tech debt exists in constitutional law as well.
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  The Electoral College exists as a compromise regarding two needs: * The need to keep the Executive and Legislative Branches separate. * The need to represent States in a manner they already agree with, for sake of brevity. Thus the Electoral College: Composed in the same way as Congress is (plus pretending D.C. is a state) whose sole task is electing the head of the Executive Branch as representatives of the States thereof. Japan (and Germany? I don't know enough about German politics) is based on the UK's Westminster system, which has its own pros and cons and isn't necessarily better.
  - vundercind 2y ago
    The idea of choosing wise locals to go judge the candidates and choose on our behalf (since a general election for president is kinda crazy—they were right about that) fell apart pretty much instantly when we started actually holding elections, making the institution all but pointless except for presenting opportunities to attack our democracy with weird procedural shit because it’s more complicated than it needs to be (see, ahem, certain recent events). We don’t need the College to weight the vote toward states without people in them, if that’s what we want to do. Even if we accept that that’s a good goal, the College is not a good way to do it.
    - Dalewyn 2y ago
      The thing is it's not the citizens of a State choosing the POTUS, it's the citizens of a State choosing which candidate their State will choose for POTUS. Remember, the US is a federation of sovereign States and POTUS as Chief Executive of the Federal government represents and is chosen by the States thereof. Each State represents its citizens respectively. The reason the College gives more weight to less populous States is, again, the need to represent States at the federal level in a way they already agree with but separated from the Legislature. So each State gets 2 Electors plus at least 1 Elector according to their population, representing the Senators and Representatives they would have in Congress. Remember that the Senate gives equal representation to all States regardless of population; California and Rhode Island each have the same representation in the Senate. Part of the reason Japan doesn't have an Electoral College is because they aren't as concerned about separating the Executive and Legislative Branches and they aren't a federation of sovereign States.

supertrope 2y ago

>replace foreign government Like a CIA sponsored military coup? Or aerial bombing?

BizarroLand 2y ago
From what I gather in the Federalist Society Papers, the original intent was that we would reinvent our country every 25 years or so, draft a new constitution and incorporate all of the changes that we needed to continue to function with the precept of being a great society, "Of the people, by the people, for the people". However, requiring 100% of states to affirm the new constitution was difficult enough in 1776 when there were only 13 states and they all had a common enemy to band together against. Doing that now would probably be impossible or require antilogic so extreme no human could read it without their ears bleeding from the brain hemorrhage.
- dragonwriter 2y ago
  > From what I gather in the Federalist Society Papers, the original intent was that we would reinvent our country every 25 years or so I think you are confusing in name the Federalist Papers with the modern and, except in attempt to steal glory, unrelated Federalist Society, and confusing in substance the Federalist Papers with a letter written by Thomas Jefferson to John Adams in which he expressed the conclusion that all laws (incl. Cobstitutions) must, based on then-current actuarial data, sunset in approximately that timeframe to avoid the living being ruled over by the dead.
  - BizarroLand 2y ago
    You're probably right. I was quoting from memory and memory is unreliable. Thanks for the clarification!
- eszed 2y ago
  Just to be pedantic: constitutional amendments, in the USA, require a maximum of 75% of the states to agree. Minimally 66.6% (repeating, of course) of them to call a constitutional convention, and ratify the results. None of that challenges your important points about the intentions of the founders, nor the difficulties upon which their project has run around.
vundercind 2y ago
The “friendlier” nation-building stuff, from being invited to help (as in the original example) to installing new states in countries we’ve conquered (you see now why the quotes on “friendlier”). Less so the coups. Usually with those we just want some degree of fealty or alignment. Dictators are easier to predict and control in that way, and one fuck of a lot cheaper to install than a functioning democracy.

0x5f3759df-i 2y ago

Yep, there’s a reason we didn’t give Germany and Japan our “exceptional” electoral college system. Tech debt exists in constitutional law as well.

Dalewyn 2y ago
The Electoral College exists as a compromise regarding two needs: * The need to keep the Executive and Legislative Branches separate. * The need to represent States in a manner they already agree with, for sake of brevity. Thus the Electoral College: Composed in the same way as Congress is (plus pretending D.C. is a state) whose sole task is electing the head of the Executive Branch as representatives of the States thereof. Japan (and Germany? I don't know enough about German politics) is based on the UK's Westminster system, which has its own pros and cons and isn't necessarily better.
- vundercind 2y ago
  The idea of choosing wise locals to go judge the candidates and choose on our behalf (since a general election for president is kinda crazy—they were right about that) fell apart pretty much instantly when we started actually holding elections, making the institution all but pointless except for presenting opportunities to attack our democracy with weird procedural shit because it’s more complicated than it needs to be (see, ahem, certain recent events). We don’t need the College to weight the vote toward states without people in them, if that’s what we want to do. Even if we accept that that’s a good goal, the College is not a good way to do it.
  - Dalewyn 2y ago
    The thing is it's not the citizens of a State choosing the POTUS, it's the citizens of a State choosing which candidate their State will choose for POTUS. Remember, the US is a federation of sovereign States and POTUS as Chief Executive of the Federal government represents and is chosen by the States thereof. Each State represents its citizens respectively. The reason the College gives more weight to less populous States is, again, the need to represent States at the federal level in a way they already agree with but separated from the Legislature. So each State gets 2 Electors plus at least 1 Elector according to their population, representing the Senators and Representatives they would have in Congress. Remember that the Senate gives equal representation to all States regardless of population; California and Rhode Island each have the same representation in the Senate. Part of the reason Japan doesn't have an Electoral College is because they aren't as concerned about separating the Executive and Legislative Branches and they aren't a federation of sovereign States.