How to stop the downward spiral of US politics

[PainRack]

So.....I think this deserves it's own thread.



How do we break the current downward spiral in US politics.



For me... Yes. The Republicans are so partisan that one cannot expect them to act in good faith. Their current actions at CPAC, Mitch McConnell endorsing Trump potential running again and the post impeachment actions are disastrous for the Republic.



This is how fascism and the end of democracy begins.



https://acoup.blog/2020/10/30/fireside- ... r-30-2020/

Of course, such negotiations of power are the basis of politics and were nothing new. What changes as a community lurched towards stasis was the steady erosion of the norms, traditions and simple restraint that made self-government possible. This process was obvious enough – with so many examples – that it is explained and discussed in a number of the ancient sources (most notably Thuc. 3.82-86, but note also Hdt. 1.59; Plb. 6.3.9-13; Arist. Ath. Pol. 2, 5, 13; Plut. Sol. 13, 29). Simply put, the two political factions would be locked in a cycle of escalation, neither willing to compromise but rather using the previous outrages of the other faction to justify the future outrages of their own faction. Thucydides notes how this had a sorting effect, “until even blood became a weaker tie than party” (Thuc. 3.82.6

The full article is worth reading because history does teach us a lot about how fall of democracies begin. It begins like it does now, when one side increasingly become partisan, then the prisoner dilemma becomes a part of politics. So no one defects. Compromised working together becomes impossible.





Now. I think most of us will disagree with his use of Athens as a model past this crisis. But we do have such an example.



Franklin Roosevelt.



The man who arguably saved American democracy and capitalism. This board is left-wing enough that well, we may not agree with what his goals were. Certainly, FDR racism is not something to be admired.



But at a time when democracy was crumbling and fasicism looked to be the best way to get out of the Great Depression, when totilatarians , anti semitic ism, isolationists in the form of America First was threatening to tear the USA away.

This while the main body of US politic was increasingly attracted by Communism as the Socialist party splintered and became more extremist as a result of Democrat persecution. Arguably, FDR takeover of socialist rheoteric , the war against the bankers, the moral need for a pension was what swerved the Democratic Party into it's current incarnation.





FDR bent the rules. The 100 days became a norm now, because FDR used executive powers in greater fashion than previous presidents. We all know his threat to pack the Courts and arguably, the Business Plot.



Yet. FDR welcomed back into the fold Republicans in his second term. America First joined the US war effort.



Somehow. Somewhere. We have to find a way to replicate what he did . Because leaving Republicans in the grasp of the party of fascism, conservatives in the hands of Q is not an option. Yes, as Jefferson said, the hotheads would have to be prosecuted under the rule of law but the great majority, indoctrinated or misled must be welcomed back into the fold,

And can history produce an instance of a rebellion so honourably conducted? I say nothing of it’s motives. They were founded in ignorance, not wickedness. God forbid we should ever be 20. years without such a rebellion.1 The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty..........



And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.

https://youtu.be/9DChl7GR-ow

As this video by Markiplier shows, this game is revealing of the problems with our media.



Somehow. We must make it the norm, reaffirm that an American isn't a fascist. That Jan 6th was an aberration. But without turning into the devil , that which we stare into the abyss

[Tribble]

Democracy only works if all sides acknowledge that a peaceful transition of power, even if it goes against one of the sides’ agenda, is preferable to war.

If one or more sides prefers violence over compromise then the whole thing falls about.

And it’s really hard when a group (such as many if not most white Christian Republicans) actively despise having to coexist with others.

How do you compromise with millions of people that at best view you as 2nd class citizens to be ignored and at worst cheering to see you imprisoned, deported, enslaved and/or executed? Even if it wrecks democracy in the process?

Make no mistake- had Trump had more fortitude and been willing to get his hands dirty and take risks, in all likelihood Congress would have been overthrown Jan 6. With the majority of Republicans cheering, I might add.

This isn’t even the 1st time - southern conservatives started a Civil War due to the mere threat that Abe Lincoln might take action at some point in the future that may curtail their ability to own slaves.

When you have a group of people who would literally rather fight and die rather than risk see enslaved people go free, you’ve got issues (which to this day have yet to be really resolved).

It’s certainly possible that cooler heads prevail but I’m not exactly optimistic atm.

[loomer]

The US's democracy is fundamentally doomed not just because there are fascists, but because the US has never actually embraced the most fundamental purpose of a democracy - namely, to protect the total equality and freedom of all people it claims under its banner. Only by resolving this innate contradiction between the purpose of democracy and the fundamental inequalities that are baked in at the foundational level can there by any actual stop to the downward spiral, rather than a mere temporary abatement and reversal.

[PainRack]

The US's democracy is fundamentally doomed not just because there are fascists, but because the US has never actually embraced the most fundamental purpose of a democracy - namely, to protect the total equality and freedom of all people it claims under its banner. Only by resolving this innate contradiction between the purpose of democracy and the fundamental inequalities that are baked in at the foundational level can there by any actual stop to the downward spiral, rather than a mere temporary abatement and reversal.

Any ideas how??

[loomer]

The US's democracy is fundamentally doomed not just because there are fascists, but because the US has never actually embraced the most fundamental purpose of a democracy - namely, to protect the total equality and freedom of all people it claims under its banner. Only by resolving this innate contradiction between the purpose of democracy and the fundamental inequalities that are baked in at the foundational level can there by any actual stop to the downward spiral, rather than a mere temporary abatement and reversal.

Any ideas how??

The return of all stolen and fraudulently acquired lands to Native American nations, the complete abolition of all structures of power that have benefited from the dual structures of settler-colonial acquisition and white supremacy, and the institution of new structures built, from the ground up, to create, maintain, and protect the equality and freedom of all people under their banners. Of course, this means that to save American democracy it is first necessary to destroy America as it is currently constituted.

A practical first step is the abolition of those structures most actively involved in perpetuating race and class based social stratification, the adoption of preferential voting with as much direct consultation as possible, and nationalization of all industries that are reliant on either extracting from, restricting control over, or damaging through pollution the shared commons and 'natural resources' (a term that is itself a problem) of the land.

[bilateralrope]

the adoption of preferential voting with as much direct consultation as possible,

I'm not sure that would help much. The big problem with the US election system is that voters, at best, only get two viable options. The candidates in first and second place in the pre-election polling. Anyone else on the ballot doesn't have a chance. All I can see ranked voting doing is reduce the risk of one of those other candidates splitting the vote.

Could you explain how ranked choice voting means there are at least 3 viable candidates in a district ?
Not examples where one of the two viable candidates isn't from one of the two major parties of their country.

Oh and those voters who get to choose between two viable candidates are the lucky ones. People in heavily gerrymandered districts, districts with popular candidates or those who aren't allowed to vote because they live in the wrong place.


What I'd do is make Congress proportional representation*, open to anyone living in the US. That should make third parties viable, hopefully viable enough to cause the Republican and Democrat parties to split. Plus going with MMP in New Zealand has done more for getting Maori MPs than the Maori electorates did, so it should have a similar effect in the US.

*I'm not sure if I'd go with pure proportional representation or MMP.

[Solauren]

Let's see...

#1 - Switch from the current "POTUS is elected in it's own election", to "the leader of the party that holds the Senate is the POTUS."
That will eliminate the electoral college, as well as the fact that Presidental elections often become popularity contests.

Like Canada's system, if the party leader does not get elected to senate, then a senator from their party can step aside, and the POTUS move to represent that 'district/region/riding'

In any case, the POTUS then appoints someone to do his work as a Senator (if a Senator stepped aside, he'd appoint that guy), and assumes the office of POTUS.

This would also let the party in control of the Senate remove the POTUS if he's doing a crappy job, simply by removing him from the party.

#2 - Redo all federal voting districts to give representation by population to areas, even if they cross state lines.
Hopefully that would actually shrink the size of Congress and the Senate.

#3 - Maximum of 4 terms TOTAL across the Senate and Congress. (POTUS does not count against this).
This will eliminate 'career federal politions', as they could only spend 16 years in office.
(24 if they managed to get relected as the majority party leader in the Senate to become President).
This will result in old ideas being removed, and new ideas and leadership coming in.

Under this set up, if the leader of party that didn't take control of the senate was elected, but it would be a fifth term, he'd have to step aside and appoint a successor. As he was elected with it being know this would happen if his party didn't take the senate, no need for a run off election.
(He'd have to have a 'running mate' for it)

Also, by putting in term limits, it prevents someone from becoming 'entrenched'.

#4 - Put in a minimum and maximum age for elected officials. (I believe there already is a min. age).
This will cut down on the possibility of an elected official having an undetected/undiagnosed/hidden mental health issue.

It would also make it so that politics isn't a "later in life choice". Anyone in an established career that wanted to run for office would have to choose between leaving that career while they are still young and ambitious, or going into politics.

- - - -

That is what I can think of for Reform for elections at the Federal level in the United States.
You could probably apply them to the State level too. If that happened, I'd actually be against having the term limits apply across State and Federal levels. If someone does really well at the State level, and his or her constituents want him to represent them at the Federal level for a few terms, let'em try.

Some other changes that could help -

Change the wording of this part of the United States Constitution

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..."

To say

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all humans shall be treated equal, regardless of their religious beliefs, political beliefs, ethnic or racial backgrounds, social or economic status, sexual orientation or gender."
(And anything else I might have forgotten).

It's now the law to give everyone the same treatment, chances, etc. There is no wiggle room.

Amend 'Free Speech' and 'Freedom of the Press' to what it was intended: To let people speak out about the government without reprisal.
Just make it so that now includes religions and corporations as well, and people in their roles with government/religions/corporations.
(This would have to be very carefully done.)

That would let people suffer the conseqences of their actions towards each other more, and maybe teach them to think and treat people better.
(Which goes along way towards preventing Facism).

That would also have the effect of propaganda networks not being able to pedal their BS as news, or even pedal it at all.

That would let the government go after people for hate speech and the like, which would actually eliminate alot of their ability to appeal to racists and extremist, as they wouldn't be able to appeal to them as easily.

It would also help muzzle so called 'firebrand preachers', and still let people expose shit when corporations try to get away with stuff they are not supposed to.

[Gandalf]

Let's see...

#1 - Switch from the current "POTUS is elected in it's own election", to "the leader of the party that holds the Senate is the POTUS."
That will eliminate the electoral college, as well as the fact that Presidental elections often become popularity contests.

Like Canada's system, if the party leader does not get elected to senate, then a senator from their party can step aside, and the POTUS move to represent that 'district/region/riding'

In any case, the POTUS then appoints someone to do his work as a Senator (if a Senator stepped aside, he'd appoint that guy), and assumes the office of POTUS.

This would also let the party in control of the Senate remove the POTUS if he's doing a crappy job, simply by removing him from the party.

Why senate as opposed to house?

[Eternal_Freedom]

I think that would still run into problems since you're no longer directly electing the POTUS. There's also the issue that America combines the Head of State/Head of Government roles, your suggestion would be fine for a Prime Minister type role with a separate, largely ceremonial President but since you've got both jobs in one I don't think that would work.

EDIT: AS for your parts about editing the text of the Constitution, that is not something done lightly or easily, IIRC you need both houses of Congress to vote for it (possibly with more than just a simple majority vote as well, I can't remember that) and then 75% of State governments to ratify it themselves.

Good luck with that.

[Solauren]

Let's see...

#1 - Switch from the current "POTUS is elected in it's own election", to "the leader of the party that holds the Senate is the POTUS."
That will eliminate the electoral college, as well as the fact that Presidental elections often become popularity contests.

Like Canada's system, if the party leader does not get elected to senate, then a senator from their party can step aside, and the POTUS move to represent that 'district/region/riding'

In any case, the POTUS then appoints someone to do his work as a Senator (if a Senator stepped aside, he'd appoint that guy), and assumes the office of POTUS.

This would also let the party in control of the Senate remove the POTUS if he's doing a crappy job, simply by removing him from the party.

Why senate as opposed to house?

Could be either. But, traditionally, doesn't the Vice President oversee Congress? Makes sense that the President would not come from there then.

[Solauren]

I think that would still run into problems since you're no longer directly electing the POTUS. There's also the issue that America combines the Head of State/Head of Government roles, your suggestion would be fine for a Prime Minister type role with a separate, largely ceremonial President but since you've got both jobs in one I don't think that would work.

I have no doubt the idea needs fine tuning, or some positions would need to be 'retooled'.

EDIT: AS for your parts about editing the text of the Constitution, that is not something done lightly or easily, IIRC you need both houses of Congress to vote for it (possibly with more than just a simple majority vote as well, I can't remember that) and then 75% of State governments to ratify it themselves.

Good luck with that.

I agree, that would be quite the political battle to accomplish.

[Eternal_Freedom]

Let's see...

#1 - Switch from the current "POTUS is elected in it's own election", to "the leader of the party that holds the Senate is the POTUS."
That will eliminate the electoral college, as well as the fact that Presidental elections often become popularity contests.

Like Canada's system, if the party leader does not get elected to senate, then a senator from their party can step aside, and the POTUS move to represent that 'district/region/riding'

In any case, the POTUS then appoints someone to do his work as a Senator (if a Senator stepped aside, he'd appoint that guy), and assumes the office of POTUS.

This would also let the party in control of the Senate remove the POTUS if he's doing a crappy job, simply by removing him from the party.

Why senate as opposed to house?

Could be either. But, traditionally, doesn't the Vice President oversee Congress? Makes sense that the President would not come from there then.

I should clarify I am neither a political scientist nor an American, but I find the structure of the US government quite fascinating. The Vice-President oversees the Senate, not the House or Congress as a whole (referring to "Congress" is like referring to "Parliament" in the UK, meaning both the Commons and the Lords) and casts a tiebreaking vote as needed (literally their only actual job besides not dying).

If I were to suggest any "fixes" for the US government, the main one would be getting rid of the electoral college to stop the "didn't win the most votes but won anyway" thing. I would also suggest splitting the Head of State/Head of Government roles into different posts, at least that way the policy-maker (PM equivalent), if they're the leader of the largest party, should have an actual majority in the House no matter what, which will evade the "Congress obstructing the President" or "the President vetoing Congress" problems that may arise.

I am intrigued by your idea of term limits for Congresspersons and Senators though, to avoid a "professional politician" class developing.

Of course, I doubt you'd be able to implement many (or any) of these changes so long as there is a crowd saying "but...but...the Founding Fathers did this, we can't change it." I mean, seriously, wtf is up with that? America worships the founding fathers, and I can't count the number of times I see or hear people talking about "what the Founding Fathers might say about this." They're dead and gone, shut up. It'd be like someone in Britain asking "Hmm, what might Horace Walpole or Robert Peel said about this."

[Rogue 9]

Some other changes that could help -

Change the wording of this part of the United States Constitution

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..."

To say

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all humans shall be treated equal, regardless of their religious beliefs, political beliefs, ethnic or racial backgrounds, social or economic status, sexual orientation or gender."
(And anything else I might have forgotten).

Care to point out exactly where that appears in the United States Constitution?

[Eternal_Freedom]

Huh I missed that one. That's the Declaration of Independence right, not the Constitution?

[Rogue 9]

Huh I missed that one. That's the Declaration of Independence right, not the Constitution?

Yes, it is. The statement is nowhere in United States law. The Constitution's preamble in fact goes, "We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." You could do worse as a mission statement.

[Solauren]

Not an American, so not a surprise I'd get them mixed up.

However, putting wording into the Constitution that the Constitution applies to every human within the countries borders, no exceptions, would still be a good idea.

[MKSheppard]

Get rid of Reynold V Sims, Repeal the 16th and 17th amendments.

[MKSheppard]

Yet. FDR welcomed back into the fold Republicans in his second term. America First joined the US war effort.

If that was true, then why did Lucky Lindy have to do everything "off the books" as a independent contractor, first working for Ford at Willow Run, getting the B-24 plant working, and then later flying off the books combat missions teaching F4U and P-38 pilots how to fly their planes to the limit?

[LadyTevar]

Huh I missed that one. That's the Declaration of Independence right, not the Constitution?

Yes, it is. The statement is nowhere in United States law. The Constitution's preamble in fact goes, "We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." You could do worse as a mission statement.

And, thanks to School House Rock, I was hearing that SUNG not Spoken as I read it.
I still think we need to work on the "Promote the General Welfare" and "Secure the blessings of Liberty" bits, especially since after they put that in the Preamble, they don't ban slavery and put us into 400+years of White Supremacy and Racism.

[Ralin]

Get rid of Reynold V Sims, Repeal the 16th and 17th amendments.

Mind elaborating on your drive-by post about how abolishing federal income tax, the direct election of senators and requiring voting districts to be approportionated based on population would stop the downward spiral of American politics.

[Rogue 9]

Yeah, can't buy nukes without the income tax.

[Solauren]

Get rid of Reynold V Sims, Repeal the 16th and 17th amendments.

Mind elaborating on your drive-by post about how abolishing federal income tax, the direct election of senators and requiring voting districts to be approportionated based on population would stop the downward spiral of American politics.

This is Shep doing his 'tough man' impersonation again.

[Tribble]

The first step must be de-escalation - which only works if both sides wish to avoid a civil war.

As things stand right now this is clearly not the case. Over 74 million Americans voted for a man who openly aspired to be a dictator and did so largely because he was a "fighter" who would violate the constitution to help their side "win". A large majority of those 74 million Americans also support the overthrow of the US government provided that it keeps them in power, up into and including storming the US Capital as needed. And even now they are in the process of purging "moderate" establishment figures to ensure absolute loyalty. Not to mention taking as many steps as possible to prevent other groups from voting at all.

Plus, the Republican base is generally more heavily armed than their opposition and a good number of them have been fantasizing about starting US Civil War 2.0 for decades.

How exactly are any of the above solutions supposed to work in such conditions?

[LadyTevar]

Get rid of Reynold V Sims, Repeal the 16th and 17th amendments.

Mind elaborating on your drive-by post about how abolishing federal income tax, the direct election of senators and requiring voting districts to be approportionated based on population would stop the downward spiral of American politics.

This is Shep doing his 'tough man' impersonation again.

Which is why I ignored him, especially with the two Amendments he listed.

[GrosseAdmiralFox]

You can't. At least, not in the way that people here want to happen. People have long ignored the little factoid that Hobbes is surprisingly accurate on the human condition, that papers like the 1996 MIT paper 'Electronic Communities: World Village or Cyber Balkans' either had their negative portions ignored if they're not outright ignored altogether, that things like DeepFakes and memetic weapons are now viable and you've got people willing to use them (it'll only be a matter of time before someone starts using DeepFakes on their political opponents and Russia let the memetic weapon genie out of the bottle)...

... the only way for things to stop is totalitarian in essence...