4 ms·

The executive branch has ignored the courts a few times, basically saying "What are you going to do about it?". I feel like it has to lead to a standoff of som

The executive branch has ignored the courts a few times, basically saying "What are you going to do about it?". I feel like it has to lead to a standoff of some group with guns saying they're following the courts/defending the constitution against another group with guns saying they're following the orders of the president (just like those Nazis who were "just following orders"). I need to print t-shirts with "Is it a coup d'etat yet?" to sell to the onlookers when this happens (in theory I could start selling these now).

lazide 2y ago
One of the first orders of business was asserting the executive branch (really the white house) was the final authority for the executive branch on what a court order or court ruling ‘means’. He just has to say ‘nuh uh’, and as long as people want their jobs, that’s it.
- chii 2y ago
  > and as long as people want their jobs so it comes to this, where people would have to take a stance, and it requires personal sacrifice on the part of those taking a stance. However, that is what it means to serve.
  - rescripting 2y ago
    The idea of “checks and balances” is that systems have the strength to counteract systems. Individuals attempting to counteract systems is a much, much taller order. People are multifaceted, and those that dissent can be replaced nearly instantly with someone who won’t. I’m not saying it’s pointless, and individuals asked to do horrible things should do nothing, but it’s much much harder to resist on an individual level than to rely on the leverage that counteracting systems can provide. Unfortunately these checks and balances have been eroded to the point where they are no longer effective.
    - lazide 2y ago
      The idea of the 3 branches is that there are systemic incentives for ‘bad people’ (which is a fundamental normal state, btw) to have incentives to screw up the bad people in the other branches. Not that ‘good people’ (an idea which most of the founding fathers would have considered a naive fantasy) would use it to save everyone. They are supposed to be 3 selfish pillars fighting each other to what is likely an actually reasonable state, not 1 or 2 pillars of ‘hero’s’ fighting evil. Which notably, presenting the executive as the ‘hero’ here is exactly what Trump is trying to do to squash what limited resistance he is getting.
jimbokun 2y ago
The President controls the most powerful military on Earth. What do the courts control? Where are their guns?
- netsharc 2y ago
  That's why the only "viable resistance" would be a high-ranking military-person with a tank battalion and thousands of soldiers who are willing to follow his conviction of "I'm going to perform insubordination because I believe my commander in chief is an enemy of the constitution, follow me if you believe the same", and then have a plan to besiege the White House/Capitol. Anything smaller will just be someone which the police can deal with. But coordinating thousands of people is hard, and any plan would leak easily and be discovered by that alcoholic wife-beating Fox News reporter. We might hear generals being fired or moved in the coming months/years of this regime. If I had to put money whether I'd see scenes like this in DC: https://youtu.be/pF8gyC-XD-w https://youtu.be/pF8gyC-XD-w , I'd have to consider whether American military people are brave or they'd just be "followers of orders". Alternatively, maybe some governors will direct their national guard to defend against what they've deemed to be illegal action done by a federal organ. Hopefully the military will show restraint if being asked to shoot fellow Americans, but hey, if MAGA has also infected the military, maybe they'll see defenders of blue states as "woke-mind-virus-infected cowards" and gleefully shoot them. Where's that book/article that says the US is already in the next civil war...
  - DudeOpotomus 2y ago
    What are they fighting a civil war for? Cheaper gas? More fast food? There is nothing now or in the near future that would fracture the country enough to fight. Once commerce stops, people will lose their collective minds. You cant tell Americans how to park, how to dress let alone what to eat or drink or do. Good luck with the collective will needed to fight for an ideologue in the 21st century.
    - netsharc 2y ago
      > Good luck with the collective will needed to fight for an ideologue in the 21st century. Look at the January 6 mob... I can imagine there's the willingness to fight for democracy or the return of the rule of law, or just "to see those corrupt scumbags be punished", people had food in 2020 but still went to the streets because of the police murder of George Floyd.

lazide 2y ago

One of the first orders of business was asserting the executive branch (really the white house) was the final authority for the executive branch on what a court order or court ruling ‘means’. He just has to say ‘nuh uh’, and as long as people want their jobs, that’s it.

chii 2y ago
> and as long as people want their jobs so it comes to this, where people would have to take a stance, and it requires personal sacrifice on the part of those taking a stance. However, that is what it means to serve.
- rescripting 2y ago
  The idea of “checks and balances” is that systems have the strength to counteract systems. Individuals attempting to counteract systems is a much, much taller order. People are multifaceted, and those that dissent can be replaced nearly instantly with someone who won’t. I’m not saying it’s pointless, and individuals asked to do horrible things should do nothing, but it’s much much harder to resist on an individual level than to rely on the leverage that counteracting systems can provide. Unfortunately these checks and balances have been eroded to the point where they are no longer effective.
  - lazide 2y ago
    The idea of the 3 branches is that there are systemic incentives for ‘bad people’ (which is a fundamental normal state, btw) to have incentives to screw up the bad people in the other branches. Not that ‘good people’ (an idea which most of the founding fathers would have considered a naive fantasy) would use it to save everyone. They are supposed to be 3 selfish pillars fighting each other to what is likely an actually reasonable state, not 1 or 2 pillars of ‘hero’s’ fighting evil. Which notably, presenting the executive as the ‘hero’ here is exactly what Trump is trying to do to squash what limited resistance he is getting.

jimbokun 2y ago

The President controls the most powerful military on Earth. What do the courts control? Where are their guns?

netsharc 2y ago
That's why the only "viable resistance" would be a high-ranking military-person with a tank battalion and thousands of soldiers who are willing to follow his conviction of "I'm going to perform insubordination because I believe my commander in chief is an enemy of the constitution, follow me if you believe the same", and then have a plan to besiege the White House/Capitol. Anything smaller will just be someone which the police can deal with. But coordinating thousands of people is hard, and any plan would leak easily and be discovered by that alcoholic wife-beating Fox News reporter. We might hear generals being fired or moved in the coming months/years of this regime. If I had to put money whether I'd see scenes like this in DC: https://youtu.be/pF8gyC-XD-w https://youtu.be/pF8gyC-XD-w , I'd have to consider whether American military people are brave or they'd just be "followers of orders". Alternatively, maybe some governors will direct their national guard to defend against what they've deemed to be illegal action done by a federal organ. Hopefully the military will show restraint if being asked to shoot fellow Americans, but hey, if MAGA has also infected the military, maybe they'll see defenders of blue states as "woke-mind-virus-infected cowards" and gleefully shoot them. Where's that book/article that says the US is already in the next civil war...
- DudeOpotomus 2y ago
  What are they fighting a civil war for? Cheaper gas? More fast food? There is nothing now or in the near future that would fracture the country enough to fight. Once commerce stops, people will lose their collective minds. You cant tell Americans how to park, how to dress let alone what to eat or drink or do. Good luck with the collective will needed to fight for an ideologue in the 21st century.
  - netsharc 2y ago
    > Good luck with the collective will needed to fight for an ideologue in the 21st century. Look at the January 6 mob... I can imagine there's the willingness to fight for democracy or the return of the rule of law, or just "to see those corrupt scumbags be punished", people had food in 2020 but still went to the streets because of the police murder of George Floyd.