It does seem the power of the judiciary will be challenged quite soon.
It will probably be with a tweet saying “Make me. You and what army?” and the courts will need to rely on the US military choosing the Constitution over the Commander in Chief.
May we all have the fortune to live securely in less interesting times. I suppose it is our duty to make that happen.
I agree it feels very slow, but identifying the correct action and then building consensus around that action takes time. Once consensus is built it is very stable though. That is supposed to be the biggest benefit of democracy; stability built through coalition.
I’m loving this saga. Better love story than Twilight.
Thank you for the write up. That distinction makes a lot of sense.
Ahh fantastic point. There isn’t really an incentive for the individuals to maintain/perpetuate the institution.
I understand the sentiment. I’m wondering about the efficacy of the strategies to achieve those end goals.
I don’t agree with this. Shareholders extracting value from a company is arguably more of an ‘inefficency’ than treating employees fairly. Well treated employees provide a benefit to the company while shareholders purely remove resources.
I have no data to back up my claim, just logic, so I could very well be wrong.
That you very much for writing this up. It is super interesting, and I feel bad for dismissing her. Unfortunately, I will probably continue people whom are the vague they.
I disagree. Minimum wage is minimum wage. If you don’t care about the moral implications of the for profit prison system… Paying equal wages for prisoners will force higher wages in the non captive population.
A plague of plagues is a plague?
That’s an unpopular opinion??
The administration is completely different. The GOP had a lot more influence on the admin choices in 2016. MAGA is the party now and they get to appoint anyone they want. 2016 still had people who believed in democracy, the 2024 administration sees it as a hinderance.
What the fuck is this headline? The main subject of the reporting is the online reaction to the actual news story. Why can’t they just report the event and not people’s reaction to it?
Woah, first I’m hearing about this. How’s it work? What’s it called? How do you find a place?
Surprisingly, Star Wars is a great example of this. A rinky dink political group (rebels) blowing up a military installation (death star) is terrorism. That does not mean the action was unjustified.
That feels like the government placing limits on the rights of corporations to express political views, which SCOTUS has stated is illegal (if you define speech as campaign contributions, which it does).
My enemy’s enemy…
If he tried, it would at the very least cause a constitutional crisis. Not to say that means much anymore, but it’s a thread I’m willing to hang onto.
https://www.businessinsider.com/what-would-happen-us-leaves-nato-trump-2025-1
I think deep state here refers to unelected government officials.
Luckily Lemmy isn’t that popular yet. (Plus we’re all poor.)