5 ms·

"If they've been proven unable to follow the law, they shouldn't be able to be elected." Because it gives incumbents a strong incentive to try influencing the

"If they've been proven unable to follow the law, they shouldn't be able to be elected." Because it gives incumbents a strong incentive to try influencing the courts against their opponents. I believe - yes, it is my opinion only - that existence of such incentives and a temptation to act upon them is, in the long run, more dangerous to democracy than allowing felons into elections. People respond to incentives. If we know anything at all about human behavior, it is that people respond to incentives. And there is no shiny nice wall separating democracies from authoritarian states. Countries slide along the scale, and they can absolutely slide in the wrong direction.

freen 2y ago
Only one political party, namely, the far right, has argued that the courts should be politicized and used to punish their political opponents. This is super dangerous “both sides”-ism. Only one side is trying to do what you think “those in power” do. Nazis will argue up and down about their right to free speech, right up until the moment they are in power. And guess what happens then?
- inglor_cz 2y ago
  I come from a former Communist country and the far left in power twisted justice beyond any recognition. We had the "pleasure" being occupied by the Nazis and then ruled by the Stalinists and the bothside-ism is absolutely spot on, because these two systems are like evil brothers. And as for France, that is why I don't trust Mélenchon any more than Le Pen, and they have 50 per cent of voters between them. Two far-somethings don't make a democracy.
  - freen 2y ago
    Neither the Nazis, nor Stalinists even remotely approximate the modern left in the US, or elsewhere. The debate is effectively between classical Liberalism, and authoritarianism/patromonialism/fascism. Forget what people called themselves: the peoples republic of North Korea certainly isn’t a republic. Socialist Left/Capitalist Right is an outdated dichotomy that is only in service of authoritarians.

freen 2y ago

Only one political party, namely, the far right, has argued that the courts should be politicized and used to punish their political opponents. This is super dangerous “both sides”-ism. Only one side is trying to do what you think “those in power” do. Nazis will argue up and down about their right to free speech, right up until the moment they are in power. And guess what happens then?

inglor_cz 2y ago
I come from a former Communist country and the far left in power twisted justice beyond any recognition. We had the "pleasure" being occupied by the Nazis and then ruled by the Stalinists and the bothside-ism is absolutely spot on, because these two systems are like evil brothers. And as for France, that is why I don't trust Mélenchon any more than Le Pen, and they have 50 per cent of voters between them. Two far-somethings don't make a democracy.
- freen 2y ago
  Neither the Nazis, nor Stalinists even remotely approximate the modern left in the US, or elsewhere. The debate is effectively between classical Liberalism, and authoritarianism/patromonialism/fascism. Forget what people called themselves: the peoples republic of North Korea certainly isn’t a republic. Socialist Left/Capitalist Right is an outdated dichotomy that is only in service of authoritarians.