• SirDerpy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    There’s no court with authority over the Supreme Court. There’s no systemic means to operationally define their means as illegitimate.

    So, if the system is to be preserved, the rules must be respected, and We the People must tolerate corrupt Justices until they choose to resign or die. But, such is intolerable! The system must yield. But, if it ignores its core rules then it deserves no respect!

    It’s important that we recognize that various systems are scams and learn how they work. But, often, just like this example, what we find is that the system allows no means of recovery that We the People would find adequate.

    They’ll always tell us to be patient, to wait for a more convenient time for change, praying that enough of us don’t reason our way into enough systemic impasses to do more than cast a meaningless ballot. Most of us have very little and trust each other even less. But, sacrificing for our neighbor is the only way forward.

    • BlameThePeacock@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      6 months ago

      The government is allowed to impeach them. Legally speaking.

      The right will block such an action though because they too are corrupt.

      • SirDerpy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        6 months ago

        The government is allowed to impeach them. Legally speaking.

        Yes.

        The right will block such an action though because they too are corrupt.

        I encourage ignoring the present day situation for a moment. Instead, think along the lines of systemic design.

        If our system exists as a two party system, if one party takes a strong position using whatever legal means, they know the other party will soon also use the tactic in greater magnitude. If they impeach Justices, the vote certainly along party lines, then the composition of Congress changes, and their Justices will surely face impeachment. If one party wisely expands the court leaving room for future expansion, the other party will in the future certainly expand the court to the limit.

        Neither party actually needs to fulfill promises to anyone but those that donate money for the propaganda. The propaganda keeps the vast majority from killing all the would-be kings, money lenders, and politicians.

        The initial designers of our system predicted that the greatest weakness is the possibility of devolution into a two party system. They thought it’d take much longer than “immediately”.

        Coming back to the modern day, and he last several years, I think some protesters said it best:

        Fuck Donald Trump and fuck Biden, too! Neither of them give a fuck about you!

        • manucode@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          6 months ago

          America’s combination of First-past-the-post and presidential democracy makes a two-party system all but inevitable.

    • spirinolas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      You guys need to write a new constitution yesterday. The US constitution is an old relic and it’s hardly surprising it’s so disfunctional.

      • Furbag@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        Been saying that for years. It’s been a quarter millennium, how about we get the best and brightest minds from every field of academia, science, philosophy, and yes, even *shudder* religion, to get together and literally hold a constitutional convention? Just toss that old scrap of parchment out and re-write it from scratch, with modern language that is unambiguous and straightforward. If the rights enshrined in the Constitution that we hold so dear to us are actually that important, I’m sure they’ll make the cut for Constitution v2.0. But while we’re in there, we might as well clarify some stuff. Let’s clarify that 14th amendment, let’s define what a “well regulated militia” is, and so on.

        Of course, the people in power like the ambiguity. It means that as long as someone somewhere could interpret the constitution in some way that is favorable to them, they can have it mean whatever they want when it suits them and as long as they keep the populace at each other’s throats with an unending culture war they know we’ll never organize enough to change that. It’s a bit of a pessimistic outlook. Our fates are controlled by people who like the dysfunction and that sucks because we could very easily fix a lot of the problems by unifying, but I don’t know if that’s possible at this point.

      • SirDerpy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Thank you for the compliment. But, lucky for us, humanity has much better choices.