4 ms·

The Senate was absolutely one of the best features of government. Unicameral legislatures are uniformly godawful. In as much as it is imperfect, it is only so b

The Senate was absolutely one of the best features of government. Unicameral legislatures are uniformly godawful. In as much as it is imperfect, it is only so because Congress has become more unicameral-like... senators are little more than representatives that stay in office six years instead of two.

tehjoker 1y ago
The senate was explicitly designed to provide a brake on the democratic aspirations of the lower classes by the founders. American government is a system of baffles designed to frustrate democratic will and preserve the property and political control of elites. The senate should be abolished along with the undemocratic supreme court (as currently constituted with lifetime appointments and the ability to overrule congress at a whim) and the imperial presidency. To be honest, we need a new constitution that promotes democracy.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 1y ago
  >American government is a system of baffles designed to frustrate democratic will The "democratic will", like the people who manifest it, is so bizarrely stupid that there are no insults strong enough to properly insult it. If it can be tolerated at all, then it is so only when there are brakes strong enough to slow it down and force it to think carefully. >To be honest, we need a new constitution that promotes democracy. Why would I (or anyone like me) ever agree to a new constitution that someone like yourself approves of? The whole point of the constitution as written was that people like yourself couldn't easily come in and change all the rules when our vigilance relaxed a bit, but here you are not even trying to hide it: you want to change all the rules in one fell swoop. No thanks. Do it the hard way to prove to yourself (and the rest of us) that a vast majority want those changes. I think senators should be appointed by the states again, repeal the 17th.
  - tomhow 11mo ago
    Please don't fulminate or make personal attacks on HN, no matter who or what you're replying to. The guidelines make it clear we're aiming for something better here, and we've had to ask you several times to try harder to observe them. We eventually have to ban accounts that keep commenting like this. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- dismalpedigree 1y ago
  Lets hear it for Tyranny by the Masses!
- kulahan 1y ago
  People that say this are only looking to ensure the repression of those at the bottom of the totem pole remain oppressed! It's a direct path to fascism, and it is designed entirely to massively accumulate wealth at the top of the pyramid while ensuring all others starve and suffer! If you're going to make inane comments about how ahckchtually everything in the world is a creation of the man who just wants to keep us down, you'll need to qualify the statements.
- rootusrootus 1y ago
  > ability to overrule congress at a whim That can be stopped easily enough. The Constitution makes it clear that Congress is the ultimate source of power; the SCOTUS power of judicial review was granted to itself by itself. Congress can (and has, a few times, though not often) make legislation not subject to judicial review.
  - unethical_ban 1y ago
    The problem is that it is far, far more difficult for the legislature to "fix" a decision by SCOTUS than it is for SCOTUS to "fix" an unconstitutional law. Supermajorities in both houses + 3/4 of the states is unlikely to ever happen again unless we face an existential threat or civil conflict.
    - rootusrootus 1y ago
      > Supermajorities in both houses + 3/4 of the states is unlikely to ever happen I agree, we seem to have perfected the art of splitting of the population into fairly stable tribes similar in size. Unless one side goes batshit insane (and even then, I think current evidence counters this idea) there is probably not going to be a supermajority in the foreseeable future.
    - NoMoreNicksLeft 11mo ago
      The funny thing is that the discussion we're having, about congressional representation, already has an amendment out there floating around, waiting to be ratified. Already has 11 or 12 states who have ratified it (I forget). It can't be canceled or expired or cockblocked. If you live in a state outside of New England, you could petition your state legislators to ratify it tomorrow. And if even one state were to ratify it, others would notice and follow. It's not unlikely. It's just... I don't know. It's as if some Svengali is out there hypnotnizing you dolts to ignore it. No other explanation makes sense. Seriously, this could be down to 2-3 jackass state representatives in Iowa or New Mexico or Florida just getting a wild hair up their ass.
CalChris 1y ago
WHY is the Senate absolutely one of the best features of government? In Britain, its name more honestly reflected the class it represents, House of Lords.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 1y ago
  In Britain there is no Congress. The name of the House of Lords has nothing to do with the United States' Senate. If we are to believe that its form and function were inspired by some other nation's government, then let's talk about its true namesake: the Roman Senate. I reject your Peel all apples because orange rinds are bitter! nonsense.
  - CalChris 1y ago
    The Roman Senate was a unicameral form of government. Bicameralism principally comes from Britain, the country which we were formerly a colony of and which gave us our dominant language, legal code, …. That said, again, WHY is the Senate absolutely one of the best features of government?
    - macintux 1y ago
      My take on some of the Senate's advantages: - No gerrymandering - Longer terms mean that senators can spend more time governing, less time running for election, and they can take a longer view on the impact of their decisions - Filibuster means that a tiny minority cannot force legislation through
      - CalChris 1y ago
        The States are a gerrymandering. Five states have populations less than a million and three wouldn't even qualify for Member of Congress by census. Yet they get two Senators, a Member and three Electoral College votes. You've got filibuster backwards. Filibuster grants rights to a Senate minority.
        1y ago

tehjoker 1y ago

The senate was explicitly designed to provide a brake on the democratic aspirations of the lower classes by the founders. American government is a system of baffles designed to frustrate democratic will and preserve the property and political control of elites. The senate should be abolished along with the undemocratic supreme court (as currently constituted with lifetime appointments and the ability to overrule congress at a whim) and the imperial presidency. To be honest, we need a new constitution that promotes democracy.

NoMoreNicksLeft 1y ago
>American government is a system of baffles designed to frustrate democratic will The "democratic will", like the people who manifest it, is so bizarrely stupid that there are no insults strong enough to properly insult it. If it can be tolerated at all, then it is so only when there are brakes strong enough to slow it down and force it to think carefully. >To be honest, we need a new constitution that promotes democracy. Why would I (or anyone like me) ever agree to a new constitution that someone like yourself approves of? The whole point of the constitution as written was that people like yourself couldn't easily come in and change all the rules when our vigilance relaxed a bit, but here you are not even trying to hide it: you want to change all the rules in one fell swoop. No thanks. Do it the hard way to prove to yourself (and the rest of us) that a vast majority want those changes. I think senators should be appointed by the states again, repeal the 17th.
- tomhow 11mo ago
  Please don't fulminate or make personal attacks on HN, no matter who or what you're replying to. The guidelines make it clear we're aiming for something better here, and we've had to ask you several times to try harder to observe them. We eventually have to ban accounts that keep commenting like this. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
dismalpedigree 1y ago
Lets hear it for Tyranny by the Masses!
kulahan 1y ago
People that say this are only looking to ensure the repression of those at the bottom of the totem pole remain oppressed! It's a direct path to fascism, and it is designed entirely to massively accumulate wealth at the top of the pyramid while ensuring all others starve and suffer! If you're going to make inane comments about how ahckchtually everything in the world is a creation of the man who just wants to keep us down, you'll need to qualify the statements.
rootusrootus 1y ago
> ability to overrule congress at a whim That can be stopped easily enough. The Constitution makes it clear that Congress is the ultimate source of power; the SCOTUS power of judicial review was granted to itself by itself. Congress can (and has, a few times, though not often) make legislation not subject to judicial review.
- unethical_ban 1y ago
  The problem is that it is far, far more difficult for the legislature to "fix" a decision by SCOTUS than it is for SCOTUS to "fix" an unconstitutional law. Supermajorities in both houses + 3/4 of the states is unlikely to ever happen again unless we face an existential threat or civil conflict.
  - rootusrootus 1y ago
    > Supermajorities in both houses + 3/4 of the states is unlikely to ever happen I agree, we seem to have perfected the art of splitting of the population into fairly stable tribes similar in size. Unless one side goes batshit insane (and even then, I think current evidence counters this idea) there is probably not going to be a supermajority in the foreseeable future.
  - NoMoreNicksLeft 11mo ago
    The funny thing is that the discussion we're having, about congressional representation, already has an amendment out there floating around, waiting to be ratified. Already has 11 or 12 states who have ratified it (I forget). It can't be canceled or expired or cockblocked. If you live in a state outside of New England, you could petition your state legislators to ratify it tomorrow. And if even one state were to ratify it, others would notice and follow. It's not unlikely. It's just... I don't know. It's as if some Svengali is out there hypnotnizing you dolts to ignore it. No other explanation makes sense. Seriously, this could be down to 2-3 jackass state representatives in Iowa or New Mexico or Florida just getting a wild hair up their ass.

CalChris 1y ago

WHY is the Senate absolutely one of the best features of government? In Britain, its name more honestly reflected the class it represents, House of Lords.

NoMoreNicksLeft 1y ago
In Britain there is no Congress. The name of the House of Lords has nothing to do with the United States' Senate. If we are to believe that its form and function were inspired by some other nation's government, then let's talk about its true namesake: the Roman Senate. I reject your Peel all apples because orange rinds are bitter! nonsense.
- CalChris 1y ago
  The Roman Senate was a unicameral form of government. Bicameralism principally comes from Britain, the country which we were formerly a colony of and which gave us our dominant language, legal code, …. That said, again, WHY is the Senate absolutely one of the best features of government?
  - macintux 1y ago
    My take on some of the Senate's advantages: - No gerrymandering - Longer terms mean that senators can spend more time governing, less time running for election, and they can take a longer view on the impact of their decisions - Filibuster means that a tiny minority cannot force legislation through
    - CalChris 1y ago
      The States are a gerrymandering. Five states have populations less than a million and three wouldn't even qualify for Member of Congress by census. Yet they get two Senators, a Member and three Electoral College votes. You've got filibuster backwards. Filibuster grants rights to a Senate minority.
      - 1y ago