4 ms·

I’m keeping a link to this comment to see how well it ages

margalabargala 7mo ago
It's currently historically accurate. It's aged 250 years so far. Civil war? Elections. WWII? Elections. Covid? Elections.
- financetechbro 7mo ago
  Wake up. Things are different this time in case you haven’t noticed
  - nostrademons 7mo ago
    They may be, but if there are no elections, there is no United States. Constitutionally, its government is predicated on having elected representatives. I could see Trump trying this, but I also can see dozens of other people or groups, some richer, more powerful, more competent, and more ruthless than Trump, just waiting in the wings for the guardrails to come off to make a play to rule the territory of the former United States. If he tries and succeeds at this it's open-season. It's not a Trump dictatorship, it's a civil war, akin to the Chinese Civil War after the emperor fell or the Syrian civil war after the Arab Spring.
  - margalabargala 7mo ago
    Yes, of course they are different. We're not embroiled in an active Civil War with tens of thousands dead and a third of the country having seceded. Most things are different from that.
  - malfist 7mo ago
    Things are absolutely different, but there is no mechanism in the constitution for canceling elections.
    - hypeatei 7mo ago
      > no mechanism in the constitution for canceling elections Sure, but there's mechanism in real life that allows cancelling elections like sending your newly funded ICE goons to polling places. Ideally everyone follows the constitution but in reality (even looking at past administrations) there's nothing stopping the executive from taking an action and saying "oops guess we'll let the courts figure it out!"
      - isthatafact 7mo ago
        I agree. Stability of a system is not so much about whether there is some mechanism or force that wants to push it away from equilibrium (because there probably is some such perturber outside of a perfectly controlled environment), but stability is more about whether there exists a stabilizing mechanism to bring the system back toward equilibrium after it starts to deviate.
- Teever 7mo ago
  In your world view is it possible for empires to fall? If so, why do you think this is not relevant to this particular empire at this particular time?
  - margalabargala 7mo ago
    Obviously. All empires either have fallen or will fall. That doesn't mean all extant empires are currently actively falling, and soon, will have fallen. The US is less divided now than it was during the Civil War, which it survived. Why would it be more likely to fall now than then?
  - fc417fc802 7mo ago
    Certainly it's possible that could happen to us. If it does I fully expect to have elections throughout the process. We have the highest concentration of weapons per capita in the world and a deeply ingrained expectation of voting. In a very dark humor sort of way it would be absolutely hilarious if someone was stupid enough to attempt to intervene in the process. We might go down in flames but you can be absolutely certain we'll have collectively agreed to light them ourselves.
- toyg 7mo ago
  Fascist Italy also held "elections", like China and Russia do today. "Elections" is not a magic concept. Free elections, on the other hand...
  - margalabargala 7mo ago
    Sure, but we're discussing what you said: > Why worry about how the midterms, if you can create a situation where elections cannot be held at all...
    - toyg 7mo ago
      The two concepts are not exclusive. You could have "elections" but with heavy ICE presence at the polls "to guarantee security", effectively ensuring only the "right kind of people" will vote. That's not free elections.
      - margalabargala 7mo ago
        That's fine. You didn't say "free elections", you said "elections not held at all". There's a difference.
        toyg 7mo ago
        that's a pedantic and fundamentally useless distinction in practice.

It's currently historically accurate. It's aged 250 years so far. Civil war? Elections. WWII? Elections. Covid? Elections.

financetechbro 7mo ago
Wake up. Things are different this time in case you haven’t noticed
- nostrademons 7mo ago
  They may be, but if there are no elections, there is no United States. Constitutionally, its government is predicated on having elected representatives. I could see Trump trying this, but I also can see dozens of other people or groups, some richer, more powerful, more competent, and more ruthless than Trump, just waiting in the wings for the guardrails to come off to make a play to rule the territory of the former United States. If he tries and succeeds at this it's open-season. It's not a Trump dictatorship, it's a civil war, akin to the Chinese Civil War after the emperor fell or the Syrian civil war after the Arab Spring.
- margalabargala 7mo ago
  Yes, of course they are different. We're not embroiled in an active Civil War with tens of thousands dead and a third of the country having seceded. Most things are different from that.
- malfist 7mo ago
  Things are absolutely different, but there is no mechanism in the constitution for canceling elections.
  - hypeatei 7mo ago
    > no mechanism in the constitution for canceling elections Sure, but there's mechanism in real life that allows cancelling elections like sending your newly funded ICE goons to polling places. Ideally everyone follows the constitution but in reality (even looking at past administrations) there's nothing stopping the executive from taking an action and saying "oops guess we'll let the courts figure it out!"
    - isthatafact 7mo ago
      I agree. Stability of a system is not so much about whether there is some mechanism or force that wants to push it away from equilibrium (because there probably is some such perturber outside of a perfectly controlled environment), but stability is more about whether there exists a stabilizing mechanism to bring the system back toward equilibrium after it starts to deviate.
Teever 7mo ago
In your world view is it possible for empires to fall? If so, why do you think this is not relevant to this particular empire at this particular time?
- margalabargala 7mo ago
  Obviously. All empires either have fallen or will fall. That doesn't mean all extant empires are currently actively falling, and soon, will have fallen. The US is less divided now than it was during the Civil War, which it survived. Why would it be more likely to fall now than then?
- fc417fc802 7mo ago
  Certainly it's possible that could happen to us. If it does I fully expect to have elections throughout the process. We have the highest concentration of weapons per capita in the world and a deeply ingrained expectation of voting. In a very dark humor sort of way it would be absolutely hilarious if someone was stupid enough to attempt to intervene in the process. We might go down in flames but you can be absolutely certain we'll have collectively agreed to light them ourselves.
toyg 7mo ago
Fascist Italy also held "elections", like China and Russia do today. "Elections" is not a magic concept. Free elections, on the other hand...
- margalabargala 7mo ago
  Sure, but we're discussing what you said: > Why worry about how the midterms, if you can create a situation where elections cannot be held at all...
  - toyg 7mo ago
    The two concepts are not exclusive. You could have "elections" but with heavy ICE presence at the polls "to guarantee security", effectively ensuring only the "right kind of people" will vote. That's not free elections.
    - margalabargala 7mo ago
      That's fine. You didn't say "free elections", you said "elections not held at all". There's a difference.
      - toyg 7mo ago
        that's a pedantic and fundamentally useless distinction in practice.