• Zaktor
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    6 months ago

    Oh no! A bad precedent. Wouldn’t want to have one of those. Surely precedent will protect us from having reproductive rights stolen, or declaring the president a king, or declaring the regulatory state invalid. The fascists are already on the march and have demonstrated they’re willing to trash precedent without the Democrats making the first move.

    But none of that matters. Is this an existential issue or not? If it is, a constitutional crisis is warranted to solve it. You can’t say something is existential and then worry about not doing anything too extreme.

    • Sanctus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      Its long overdue for the Democrats to take some extreme measures. Without the opposing forces we’ll certainly not be a republic by November. I’m ready to protest en masse. Shit I’ll help plan.

      • Zaktor
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Starting collective action has always been the big stumbling block for the left-of-center in America. Europeans would riot for far less. We need more unions and unions willing to be political to help act as a nucleus for mass protests to say they can’t just do whatever they want. People should believe they have power other than just voting or signing a petition.

        The Supreme Court made bribery semi-legal, elevated allied presidents to kings, and dismantled the regulations that do most of the heavy lifting to keep our air and water clean. While I concur with many Democrats correct statements about how bad these rulings are, they should be leading people to the streets. Hell, the three dissenting judges should be going before the senate to explain how antithetical to American democracy the most recent ruling is. Stop pretending the system is working when it’s in freefall with no correction in sight.