this post was submitted on 22 Jan 2025
556 points (93.0% liked)

No Stupid Questions

36556 readers
1117 users here now

No such thing. Ask away!

!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.

All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.



Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.

If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.



Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.

If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.



Credits

Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!

The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

You'd think a hegemony with a 100-years tradition of upkeeping democracy against major non-democratic players, would have some mechanism that would prevent itself from throwing down it's key ideology.

Is it really that the president is all that decides about the future of democracy itself? Is 53 out of 100 senate seats really enough to make country fall into authoritarian regime? Is the army really not constitutionally obliged to step in and save the day?

I'd never think that, of all places, American democracy would be the most volatile.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)
[–] ddplf@szmer.info 1 points 3 hours ago

Oh nice, someone created a JavaScript-heavy website based on >100MB minimals.cc boilerplate to compose something that could well be made of a single HTML document.

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 15 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (1 children)

Couldn't keep a:

34 count felon

Child rapist

Fraudster

Tax dodger

Draft dodger

Grifter

Deadbeat

Wife beater

Philanderer

Classified documents thief

Obstructionist

Out of office... so why would they be able to keep a Nazi out?

[–] Emerald@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Tax dodger

and draft dodger lol

[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 3 points 20 hours ago

Forgot that. Added.

[–] jason 15 points 21 hours ago

We enter parliament in order to supply ourselves, in the arsenal of democracy, with its own weapons. If democracy is so stupid as to give us free tickets and salaries for this bear's work, that is its affair. We do not come as friends, nor even as neutrals. We come as enemies. As the wolf bursts into the flock, so we come.

Joseph Goebbels

[–] fermionsnotbosons@lemmy.ml 12 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

The US government is not (and has never been) against fascism for ideological reasons. Fascism and American-style democracy go hand in hand quite well. Our government fought a war against fascists because they disrupted the global trade status quo and threatened US economic prosperity and that of our primary trade partners.

[–] flop_leash_973@lemmy.world 6 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Technically even the time we did it only officially after the fascists declared war on us first. It was all lend lease, etc before that.

[–] fermionsnotbosons@lemmy.ml 3 points 19 hours ago

You're totally right, the US government and business elite were content to make money from both sides of the conflict right up until Dec 7, 1941 and the subsequent DoWs from Germany and Italy (once the US declared on Japan). They may have favored Britain and France in trade/indirect support somewhat before that, but that was more a result of historical diplomatic and economic ties, rather than any issue with the German political system.

[–] CidVicious@sh.itjust.works 31 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It has impeachment. The list of reasons for impeachment are (quite possibly intentionally) vague. But it has to be done through Congress.

[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And when the nazi controls Congress you know how far that'll go.

[–] CidVicious@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yeah, it's rather obviously flawed in light of the current situation, but that is the mechanism that exists in the constitution.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Joeffect@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You mean for the guy who was already impeached twice... And still voted for to be president?

[–] CidVicious@sh.itjust.works 16 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Well the mechanism for preventing criminals who shit all over the constitution from getting reelected is supposed to be people not voting for him. There's not really much a constitutional democracy can do about voters being fucking morons. Kind of an inherent flaw in the system.

[–] CommissarVulpin@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

How do you build a system that doesn’t depend on voters not being morons? Everything I can think of, up to and including full-on authoritarianism, has human shittiness as a glaring weak point. The founding fathers assumed that people would, for the most part, act in good faith, and it kept us going for a couple hundred years, but all that is starting to fall apart.

[–] CidVicious@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 day ago

I am not arguing in favor of authoritarianism or against democracy, to be clear. Just saying there is an inherent risk that if you give the common people power, the common people might do something dumb with it. I'm not aware of a system that removes that risk without other considerable downsides. There are other democratic governments that have fewer structural issues than the US, but none of them prevent the whole "sometimes, voters are very dumb" thing.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] squid_slime@lemm.ee 9 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago)

Assuming America is a democracy is the first mistake. killing the native population, viewing non land owners, poc and many more as lessors. Let's not forget who wrote the constitution.

[–] tiny@midwest.social 21 points 1 day ago

The Constitution assumes the people through the ballot box or through protest would clean up any issues like that

[–] HeyThisIsntTheYMCA@lemmy.world 3 points 19 hours ago

Depends how you define "instruments". For example, there was a recent survey that we have something like 500 million, uh, instruments.

[–] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

The problem is he won the election.

The vote is the final check and balance.

49% of Voters are either sympatico or stupid.

[–] GiddyGap@lemm.ee 10 points 1 day ago (5 children)

And that's the problem with the US election system. In basically any other developed democracy, there are ways to call a new special election. The four years are often the max between elections, not the minimum.

If a new leader proves unpopular, you toss them out and install a new one.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 6 points 1 day ago (3 children)

The problem is also that the Republican party is a fascist party, so the other check, impeachment, is thoroughly useless.

[–] shades@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 18 hours ago

If you have only one party on the ballot and it's a fascist party, you don't really have a democratic choice do you? You can either vote for fascism or not vote for it.

If you have a fascist party on the ballet In an ONLY TWO partys political system, you don't really have a democratic choice do you? You can either vote for fascism or not vote for it.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Merlwyb673@lemm.ee 4 points 21 hours ago

This is the result of ever-expanding executive power.

[–] eran_morad@lemmy.world 4 points 21 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Psythik@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago

This x1000.

Few things frustrate more than a fellow leftist who still refuses to arm themselves in today's climate. I truly believe that the world needs fewer guns, but read the room for fuck's sake. There are far too many people in the US that want our kind dead, simply because we exist. All they need is for their God Emperor to say the word.

[–] collapse_already@lemmy.ml 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We really only have the Second Amendment. I am now on a list.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 9 points 1 day ago (11 children)

Yeah, with every other cool person.

load more comments (11 replies)
[–] kava@lemmy.world 20 points 1 day ago

I’d never think that, of all places, American democracy would be the most volatile

Ignore the political system and look at the economic system. The US is capitalist and as it turns out- capitalism is not mutually exclusive with fascism.

If a human being lives long enough, he will eventually develop cancer. It's simply a natural physical consequence of repeated cell division. Eventually there's some mutation that leads to a chain reaction. The cancer spreads enough and there's no going back. Capitalism, similarly, will always inevitably embrace fascism.

Marx got it wrong. He believed that the workers, realizing their position as class consciousness increases, would inevitably revolt against the power structure. The reality is more depressing.

Capitalism has cycles of crisis. Sometimes the economy is doing good which leaves the workers content. Sometimes the economy is doing bad. The problem is when the economy is doing bad coincides with some other set of crisis, the combination of events radicalizes the workers. This part Marx predicted. However he was mistaken about human nature.

Really, our problem started back in 2008. The global economy never fully recovered. Interest rates were kept low in a desperate attempt to increase spending to keep the boat from tipping. Then COVID pumped up inflation to historic levels- supply chain shortages wrecked chaos. After that, the Russian invasion of Ukraine pushed up inflation even higher. Prices go up but wages lag behind.

Workers, naturally, become more radicalized- as Marx predicted. The issue is Marx was too optimistic about human nature. Humans as a whole are fearful herd animals. They need a shepherd to point somewhere. And eventually, inevitably, some megalomaniac with a vision will take advantage of a vulnerable system and point somewhere. In the 1930s it was to the Jews and the communists. Today, it's the illegals and "wokeism".

All this to say that this shouldn't be surprising. Left wing voices have been warning about this for a long time.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 19 points 1 day ago

Hitler didn't take power democratically. Neither did Mussolini or Franco. They each found cracks in how liberal democracy worked in their respective countries. Those cracks were usually the places where the system was decidedly undemocratic, which in those three cases, was generally something where the old nobles still had some power and they lined up behind fascists to save them from leftists.

America never had nobles, but it does have plenty of cracks in its liberal democracy to be exploited by fascists.

So to answer your question simply, no, there are no instruments to fix this. Congress can potentially either reign Trump in with legislation, or even impeach him, but I don't expect either one to happen. If the GOP can be swept out of Congress in 2026, then we can maybe start to fix some things without resorting to extralegal methods. Even that is only a starting point.

I do know for sure that we can't go back to the old trajectory as if Trump was just an outlier.

[–] T156@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

Normally, it would be the electoral system that would act as the check. But otherwise, it doesn't put any other limits based on political belief and affiliation (other than having allegiances to other political powers). If the majority wanted to elect someone who wishes to abolish the democratic election system, then that is what they will get.

That's possibly for the better. Being able to bar given political alignments or affiliation from office would either need to be so specific so as to be useless (a modern nazi typically has little directly to do with the original), or be broad enough that it'd be a dangerous thing, since it could be used in either direction.

[–] Matombo@feddit.org 45 points 1 day ago (7 children)

It's funny that Germany has safeguards against nazis in power in it's constitution which was designed ~~by~~ in cooperation with the USA, France and GB, yet afaik all three don't have similar mechanics in their own constitutions because they never belived to have to deal with the next hitler themselfs.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] clutchtwopointzero@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

America's vaunted "checks and balances" are, in the end, just smoke and mirrors to lie to the population and hide the fact that American institutions give way too much power to the president and there are no institutional controls to make the president behave.

[–] xor@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 day ago

not true. congress could definitely remove the president… they just won’t do it because they’re too fascist themselves….

[–] Daerun@lemmy.world 42 points 1 day ago

If you really believe that the USA has "100-years tradition of upkeeping democracy against major non-democratic players" you are in delusion.

[–] Norgoroth@lemmy.world 13 points 1 day ago

Second amendment

[–] masquenox@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 1 day ago (2 children)

a hegemony with a 100-years tradition of upkeeping democracy against major non-democratic players

Your proof of this is... what?

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›