3 ms·
The difference in the UK is, there is no recourse. It's actually why America exists as a state to begin with. They have parliamentary supremacy and no enshrined
by thereddaikon 2y ago
The difference in the UK is, there is no recourse. It's actually why America exists as a state to begin with. They have parliamentary supremacy and no enshrined checks and balances against parliament. Nor do they have a formal constitution. And the populace is disarmed. A sufficiently united parliament can in theory do what it wants. The only practical risk they have is a coordinated coup by the military.
The US system, while far from perfect, does have enshrined checks and balances. A formal constitution that limits the powers of branches. And an armed populace with a history of protest and unrest when things don't go their way.
- artistic_regard 2y ago[dead]
- zfg 2y ago> The US system, while far from perfect, does have enshrined checks and balances. The current administration is having a good think about fixing that: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/02/trump-vance-courts/681632/ https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2025/02/trump-v...