THAT'S the problem you have with the DSA platform? What they're proposing doesn't sound all that different from the parliamentary systems that most democracies use. Both systems have their good and bad points (though the fact that it's a lot easier to remove a bad leader is feeling pretty relevant these days) but it's not crazy.
One part of the Constitution that certainly hasn't "stood the test of time" is the Electoral College. Twice in sixteen years it gave us "winners" who lost the popular vote. Which in turn gave us the Iraq War, January 6, and the majority of the Supreme Court that gave Trump practical immunity.
Are you serious? The platform explicitly calls for the end of capitalism, nationalization of major corporations (who decides what "major" is?), and the end of policing. Now, this is not going to happen. But the fact that a rehash of the worst ideology of the last century that killed many more people than Nazism is proudly presented by DSA as a future utopia should give everybody a pause. Would you vote for a neo-Nazi party, even if there was no real chance for a racially pure state to be created in the US? I assume not. How is socialism different?
My point, which I thought was obvious, is that there's so much in the platform that's way worse than abolishing the Senate, so why concentrate on that?
I would also argue that Donald Trump has already nationalized intel chip manufacturer and is attempting to take us into a fascist regime. Its ironic that for all the problems you assume the progressive platform has (which they do indeed have.) You would cherry pick and focus on the worst things they want. I urge you to look at project 2025 from heritage foundation then come back here and tell me you still have any desire to keep republicans in office? This is a lose lose situation. Honestly? from talking with my friends from both political persuasions including myself we are honestly done with both parties and the democrats better start working together with progressives which most actually are and some local republicans are actually working together as well to get corporations completely removed from government control.
My one big complaint right now is that congress SHOULD BE DOING THEIR JOB instead of capitulating to a mad man that is hell bent on starting a global conflict likely to destroy everybody. The supreme court in particular one federal judge has been blocking trump's power plays, law suits are swarming the republican party AND midterm primaries are murdering republicans at all levels of thought. Now I am a man that has studied some american history and I tell you this it isn't the first time such a situation has happened.
Again in one of my other comments the conservative parties such as the federalist and whigs collapsed and fragmented creating differing political parties. When Dwight D. Eisenhower made his speech concerning the military industrial complex he also spoke at length about the death of a political party that attempts to dismantle the social security system. I ask you in what world do you think any republican is going to be left standing after mid terms and even before it?
Republicans AND democrats that are tied to corporate control and scandals aren't likely to be surviving with what's coming and donald trump is looking likely to be condemned to high treason for many of the scandals that will be dropping and soon. It is very likely the US will be entering a reform period and trials arresting and breaking up massive multi-national corporations. You can expect other global countries to also follow suit. Much of these scandals tie DIRECTLY back to the epstein files. When you break laws it tends to leave a trail of breadcrumbs and there are MANY MANY breadcrumbs that are absolutely public knowledge already.
Case in point my own expose on the failures of AI as a technology to be feasibly used in an arms race. The realistic chances of even remotely getting even a tenth of these things down for what "THEY" want isn't even remotely feasible on top of the financial scandals of brokerages and banks attempting to bankroll this. We are perhaps looking at the worst financial disaster since the fall of enron multiplied on a scale you cannot even begin to imagine.
No as far as I am concerned the republican party is absolutely GONE PERIOD. They have forfeited any right to exist as a political party when they backed Donald J Trump and they are grasping desperately for straws right now with Mitch Mcconnell missing in action and Lindsey Graham recently passed away. Every aspect of this political party has become an absolute joke and everybody from all walks of life want them removed poste haste.
Allow me to break down the seriousness of what I am trying to explain to you in history the french revolution had key indicators of a potential revolution that were fulfilled to the T. Case in point in france 1790s as an example in france the military were fighting "forever wars and losing" much like what we have now so they were upset at the aristocracy much like what the military is upset at right now thats strike 1, the police are upset with the january 6th slush fund that Donald Trump attempted to give to the rioters from taxpaying dollars so thats strike 2 and 3 both political alignments of democrats AND republicans who pay taxes are upset at him and the republican party AND the police force which defended the politicians during january 6th are upset.
Strike 4 is the supreme court TO A DEGREE and the lesser courts across each state including some federal have blocked Donald Trump's power play. Any attempt he has at even attempting to seize power from what congress has given him is likely going to end in bloody revolution and the end of the republican party FOREVER.
Allow me to finish with one caveat If you don't desire violent revolution I would strongly urge any figure of notable influence to inform this of that fact as I have already attempted to try and have been met with silence you might have better luck. To Mr Fukuyama I hope you understand my concerns when I say this these people have absolutely NO CLUE what they are tangling with and its very certain that the republican party will cease to exist as a political party after all is said and done. I have done my absolute best as a citizen to bring this point home to my representatives and have been met with indifference or silence.
Fun fact the citizens of maine stormed susan collins house violently. I would strongly STRONGLY URGE you to take this quite serious because its apparent to me you have zero clue of what is actually going on out there right now.
First, nobody has nationalized anything. States and governments have always protected specific industries, especially of military significance. Second, why is Project 2025 any worse than the DSA Platform? The difference is that the latter is the official platform of a political party, and thus far more dangerous. Third, there is no fascism in the US. You literally know nothing about the definition or history of fascism to think that Trump is a reincarnation of El Duce (and of course, Nazism is not the same as fascism, so comparisons with Hitler are even more ignorant). Fascism is dead. There is autocracy, as in China or Russia, but the US has the Constitution to protect against it. And finally, I still fail to see what, exactly, you are so afraid of. A revolution? For that, you need a party such as the Bolsheviks. DSA are clowns. They would not be able to lead an insurgence. Their ideology is extremely dangerous, they are not (yet). And honestly, the rest of your comment is just too convoluted to parse out. Who are “THEY”? I do not believe in conspiracy theories.
okay lets break this down mathematically with a simple question for you and if you can't answer this one you are dead to me PERIOD what is answer to 2+2?
THINK AGAIN and yeah both outcomes are doable and again you don't read or care to look. AND AGAIN you don't seem to grasp the severity of the situation so I will line it up to you ala french revolution style and allow me to be clear because its clear to me you don't obviously care or are badly BADLY misinformed. MILITARY HATES HIM, POLICE HATE HIM, BOTH SIDES ON MODERATES HATE HIM AND FAR LEFT, the constitution still exists and we are better armed then don the con. ALLOW me to enlighten you of your folly you idiot yes revolution is very very real possibility do you read history books at all? god how so very painful do I have to spell this out for you aside from dismantling you piece by piece in bloody fashion its almost like arguing with IDIOTS. oh wait... IT IS ARGUING WITH IDIOTS.
First, I strongly suggest you go easy on capitals. Second, the definition of fascism is given in Roger Griffin’s book aptly named Fascism, so I recommend reading it. I also recommend Martin Malia, Niall Ferguson and Martin Gilbert on the history of revolutionary movements. In other words - read some books instead of going down X rabbit holes.
also look at what palantir is attempting to with their 22 point manifesto posted PUBLICLY ON TWITTER. A FASCIST REGIME CHANGEOVER. AGAIN here's an article detailing it:
I am also going to add a conjecture are you using AI to attempt to give me the definition of fascism? Because allow me to enlighten you on some facts I study a man's works called on socialism AND omnipotent government and he economically, morally, and empirically breaks down the flaws of the systems in defense of liberalism. Fascism is still Fascism regardless of what you think the definition can or should be. If you actually care a whit about the state of society as well as the US government instead of actually arguing with me perhaps you should take a closer look at my own channel.
With that being said I have no further use for people attempting to attack me on the definition of fascism when it is clear to me that a 100 year old world war 2 veteran has called us a fascist state. AGAIN if you don't want me to use caps and yell at you? Perhaps you should listen and start reading ACTUAL books instead of quoting me the definitions of the what such regimes and governmental systems are. I do also read about political science EXTENSIVELY and have a deeper appreciation of liberalism. Not that I expect you to actually understand what liberalism is considering you don't even know what fascism is perhaps you are the one that should be going back to school on the subject thank you.
Parliamentary systems do not make judiciary “subordinate” to their parliament. Many of them do a much better job of keeping the judiciary politcally independent than US.
this is a painful truth that people need to realize the supreme court should not ever be governed by partisan quackery the problems we have in the US is that if a democratic majority wins they would likely just pack the courts with democratic stooges and this sets an entirely same problem that we are currently dealing with right now from conservatives. Politics isn't he did this so I must do this its about political compromise and understanding that you never get everything you ever want out of a system. Governments just simply do not work that way.
back in the 1860s and after the civil war of north america the political left engaged with progressivism with the rise of teddy roosevelt and much of the policies aimed at bettering the world. Back in the 1780s and prior to the civil war the political party known as the federalist party collapsed and reformed. The United States and liberalism should never be afraid of such changes to its public policy. Socialism with its poison fruits should be held aloft and explored as a cognitive disadvantage however complete total pluralism is a dying trait in today's society with its massive populations. I would argue that progressivism with centrist ideologies is the new way forward. Liberalism is the freedom of expression and perhaps compromise and political survival is the only new way forward.
I would argue that perhaps liberalism needs to be shaken up and reformed under the idea of "post liberalism." The concept of taking liberalism to its radical ends utterly. Freedom with rule of law and expressionism of pursuit of happiness. History is the byproduct of our own mistakes and we must realize the cost of not exploring it at any point.
Perhaps good change is coming or not. I will say this much the idea that liberalism is dead is not going to happen to me. I will fight and continue defending the political ideology of liberalism by counteracting the absurdity of the other ideologies. Authoritarianism in my mind has an expiration date and sooner or later they all fall down.
What Democrat has endorsed the DSA platform? Surely many Democrats are called socialists and some democrats describe themselves as Democratic socialists, but I have heard none espouse this platform. Am I not listening close enough?
I don't agree with many of the economic or social policies championed by the DSA, but I welcome new ideas on structural political reform. Is it really a "scary possibility" to have a political system where the judicial and legislative functions are subordinate to a supreme legislative institution? Are Australia, Canada, or the UK totalitarian states?
And is our constitutional system really something worth defending in its current form? Right now, we fail to deliver capable governance or really any coherent policymaking in the national interest. Public faith in democracy is eroding quickly. An authoritarian and manifestly unfit demagogue has captured the executive. I suspect the structure of our constitutional system, with its inefficiencies and veto points, is partially to blame. Those interested in the preservation of democracy for the long haul should welcome a conversation on its repair.
For my part, I think there is a lot we could within the confines of the current constitutional order. E.g., limit judicial review, move to a national popular vote for President, limit the role of the Senate and streamline legislative rules, and of course getting money of out politics. But the ideas championed here by DSA are far less threatening to basic human liberty than those entertained by JD Vance (an admitted reader of neo-fascist/monarchist writer Curtis Yarvin).
I see the DSA as doing the essential democratic work of formulating alternatives to the status quo and making a case for serious change. Whether you agree with the specifics of their proposals or not, what I think is inarguable is that we need a conversation in this country about major structural changes to the Constitution and our governing institutions. It has been almost 240 years since the Constitution was written; Mr Lane may be right that it has served us well and should be defended, but it is not holy writ. Other constitutions in other countries have changed radically with time while ours has been shut in a time capsule. Americans by and large no longer see the people and institutions produced to lead us under the Constitution as trustworthy; they see them as self-serving, corrupt, and in thrall to wealthy patrons. And they’re right. As Lampedusa tells us in The Leopard: “If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change.”
The DSA should be asking themselves what voters want, not what they want. If they takeover the Democratic Party it will simply confirm my decision to emigrate 5 years ago. I would never vote for a party the DSA controls. So I just won't bother voting anymore until there is a party that reflects my values and beliefs.
the problem with this statement is that voters did vote for this and centrist democrats are losing because they are not listening to what voter's actually want. Look if you despise socialism then maybe ask a voter in those areas what they are looking at because people on both sides of the political spectrum are tired of the posturing and capitulating to gigantic corporate donors backing the political party that is "supposed" to represent the working class. When both parties have stopped listening to the voter base you might want to ask yourselves why?
Color me cynical but Americans have recently elected a grotesque con man who told them he would address their real concerns. Has he? You wouldn't know it from any of the current economic numbers. Yet many refuse to hold him accountable because to do so would be to admit they fell for a swindler. I fear the same kind of con artists on the radical Left. There are undoubtedly people of good will there but I think in the end they will be useful tools for those interested only in power. I am a Social Democrat with the emphasis on Democrat. I want an end to income inequality, an expanded welfare state, and a move away from an "I" and back toward a "we" society. The DSA are Democratic Socialists with an emphasis on Socialism. I think their leaders have fallen for the modern "hermeneutic of suspicion" that suggests it's all about power and how to keep it. Unfortunately, I know whereof I speak. My mother's entire family died in Stalin's gulags at the hands of people who allegedly wanted to create "the workers' paradise" but in the end reduced the whole country to a vast prison for scores of millions of people to preserve their absolute power. I would consider supporting the DSA when they convince me they are more about the general welfare than in accumulating and holding power. They need to commit to a democratic political order of one man, one vote.
When the political left entangled itself with identity politics and continued going down the rabbit hole of buying into it Rural Americans literally wrote the WHOLE PARTY off as a lost cause. When Hilary Clinton literally attacked half the voter base by calling them all white supremacists then you guys wonder precisely WHY YOU LOST? Why would you ever be surprised that somebody like Donald Trump won? He ran on the platform of promising to upend the entire establishment.
Here is another tragedy that you seem to not take into account. The educational systems established by government itself have been completely eroded and destroyed by the establishment government. The whole reason we are in this mess is BECAUSE OF GOVERNMENT. I don't know about you but when you tangle with anarchy why would you ever be surprised its not going to come? I know precisely the horrors of the "far left". I have studied the rise and fall of dictators and trust me every single one of them always has an end point. In the case of the US I am not seeing the left attempt to repair any of the bridges that they have burned with half the population simply because you call out American's as "dumb".
The truest tragedy of our state of politics is that both sides have attempted to take us into an authoritarian end point and people from all walks of life are literally fed up with it in general. NEWS FLASH: This is globally happening everywhere with AI and data centers nearly every government alongside China AND THE US want to take this insane warped thought to its overall conclusion with AI. You worry about authoritarianism? NO I worry about universal anarchy because these fools and us are tangling with the similarity of a planet buster nuke and several of them being made daily by companies with zero understanding of the "science".
I would rather prefer liberalism as a free thought experiment and representative governmental systems to keep society from collapsing into complete and total chaos. If you have any better options then what you are posting I am all ears but trust me americans are absolutely DISGUSTED with both parties and I am of the mind that anarchy will be coming in 5 years time because you just don't get it.
It is sad, but a Democratic Party in thrall to the DSA would be no better than a republican party in thrall Trump.
THAT'S the problem you have with the DSA platform? What they're proposing doesn't sound all that different from the parliamentary systems that most democracies use. Both systems have their good and bad points (though the fact that it's a lot easier to remove a bad leader is feeling pretty relevant these days) but it's not crazy.
One part of the Constitution that certainly hasn't "stood the test of time" is the Electoral College. Twice in sixteen years it gave us "winners" who lost the popular vote. Which in turn gave us the Iraq War, January 6, and the majority of the Supreme Court that gave Trump practical immunity.
Are you serious? The platform explicitly calls for the end of capitalism, nationalization of major corporations (who decides what "major" is?), and the end of policing. Now, this is not going to happen. But the fact that a rehash of the worst ideology of the last century that killed many more people than Nazism is proudly presented by DSA as a future utopia should give everybody a pause. Would you vote for a neo-Nazi party, even if there was no real chance for a racially pure state to be created in the US? I assume not. How is socialism different?
My point, which I thought was obvious, is that there's so much in the platform that's way worse than abolishing the Senate, so why concentrate on that?
I would also argue that Donald Trump has already nationalized intel chip manufacturer and is attempting to take us into a fascist regime. Its ironic that for all the problems you assume the progressive platform has (which they do indeed have.) You would cherry pick and focus on the worst things they want. I urge you to look at project 2025 from heritage foundation then come back here and tell me you still have any desire to keep republicans in office? This is a lose lose situation. Honestly? from talking with my friends from both political persuasions including myself we are honestly done with both parties and the democrats better start working together with progressives which most actually are and some local republicans are actually working together as well to get corporations completely removed from government control.
My one big complaint right now is that congress SHOULD BE DOING THEIR JOB instead of capitulating to a mad man that is hell bent on starting a global conflict likely to destroy everybody. The supreme court in particular one federal judge has been blocking trump's power plays, law suits are swarming the republican party AND midterm primaries are murdering republicans at all levels of thought. Now I am a man that has studied some american history and I tell you this it isn't the first time such a situation has happened.
Again in one of my other comments the conservative parties such as the federalist and whigs collapsed and fragmented creating differing political parties. When Dwight D. Eisenhower made his speech concerning the military industrial complex he also spoke at length about the death of a political party that attempts to dismantle the social security system. I ask you in what world do you think any republican is going to be left standing after mid terms and even before it?
Republicans AND democrats that are tied to corporate control and scandals aren't likely to be surviving with what's coming and donald trump is looking likely to be condemned to high treason for many of the scandals that will be dropping and soon. It is very likely the US will be entering a reform period and trials arresting and breaking up massive multi-national corporations. You can expect other global countries to also follow suit. Much of these scandals tie DIRECTLY back to the epstein files. When you break laws it tends to leave a trail of breadcrumbs and there are MANY MANY breadcrumbs that are absolutely public knowledge already.
Case in point my own expose on the failures of AI as a technology to be feasibly used in an arms race. The realistic chances of even remotely getting even a tenth of these things down for what "THEY" want isn't even remotely feasible on top of the financial scandals of brokerages and banks attempting to bankroll this. We are perhaps looking at the worst financial disaster since the fall of enron multiplied on a scale you cannot even begin to imagine.
No as far as I am concerned the republican party is absolutely GONE PERIOD. They have forfeited any right to exist as a political party when they backed Donald J Trump and they are grasping desperately for straws right now with Mitch Mcconnell missing in action and Lindsey Graham recently passed away. Every aspect of this political party has become an absolute joke and everybody from all walks of life want them removed poste haste.
Allow me to break down the seriousness of what I am trying to explain to you in history the french revolution had key indicators of a potential revolution that were fulfilled to the T. Case in point in france 1790s as an example in france the military were fighting "forever wars and losing" much like what we have now so they were upset at the aristocracy much like what the military is upset at right now thats strike 1, the police are upset with the january 6th slush fund that Donald Trump attempted to give to the rioters from taxpaying dollars so thats strike 2 and 3 both political alignments of democrats AND republicans who pay taxes are upset at him and the republican party AND the police force which defended the politicians during january 6th are upset.
Strike 4 is the supreme court TO A DEGREE and the lesser courts across each state including some federal have blocked Donald Trump's power play. Any attempt he has at even attempting to seize power from what congress has given him is likely going to end in bloody revolution and the end of the republican party FOREVER.
Allow me to finish with one caveat If you don't desire violent revolution I would strongly urge any figure of notable influence to inform this of that fact as I have already attempted to try and have been met with silence you might have better luck. To Mr Fukuyama I hope you understand my concerns when I say this these people have absolutely NO CLUE what they are tangling with and its very certain that the republican party will cease to exist as a political party after all is said and done. I have done my absolute best as a citizen to bring this point home to my representatives and have been met with indifference or silence.
Fun fact the citizens of maine stormed susan collins house violently. I would strongly STRONGLY URGE you to take this quite serious because its apparent to me you have zero clue of what is actually going on out there right now.
First, nobody has nationalized anything. States and governments have always protected specific industries, especially of military significance. Second, why is Project 2025 any worse than the DSA Platform? The difference is that the latter is the official platform of a political party, and thus far more dangerous. Third, there is no fascism in the US. You literally know nothing about the definition or history of fascism to think that Trump is a reincarnation of El Duce (and of course, Nazism is not the same as fascism, so comparisons with Hitler are even more ignorant). Fascism is dead. There is autocracy, as in China or Russia, but the US has the Constitution to protect against it. And finally, I still fail to see what, exactly, you are so afraid of. A revolution? For that, you need a party such as the Bolsheviks. DSA are clowns. They would not be able to lead an insurgence. Their ideology is extremely dangerous, they are not (yet). And honestly, the rest of your comment is just too convoluted to parse out. Who are “THEY”? I do not believe in conspiracy theories.
okay lets break this down mathematically with a simple question for you and if you can't answer this one you are dead to me PERIOD what is answer to 2+2?
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/what-economic-and-policy-experts-think-about-the-u-s-governments-stake-in-intel
THINK AGAIN and yeah both outcomes are doable and again you don't read or care to look. AND AGAIN you don't seem to grasp the severity of the situation so I will line it up to you ala french revolution style and allow me to be clear because its clear to me you don't obviously care or are badly BADLY misinformed. MILITARY HATES HIM, POLICE HATE HIM, BOTH SIDES ON MODERATES HATE HIM AND FAR LEFT, the constitution still exists and we are better armed then don the con. ALLOW me to enlighten you of your folly you idiot yes revolution is very very real possibility do you read history books at all? god how so very painful do I have to spell this out for you aside from dismantling you piece by piece in bloody fashion its almost like arguing with IDIOTS. oh wait... IT IS ARGUING WITH IDIOTS.
First, I strongly suggest you go easy on capitals. Second, the definition of fascism is given in Roger Griffin’s book aptly named Fascism, so I recommend reading it. I also recommend Martin Malia, Niall Ferguson and Martin Gilbert on the history of revolutionary movements. In other words - read some books instead of going down X rabbit holes.
also look at what palantir is attempting to with their 22 point manifesto posted PUBLICLY ON TWITTER. A FASCIST REGIME CHANGEOVER. AGAIN here's an article detailing it:
https://deanblundell.substack.com/p/peter-thiels-palantir-the-company
Again you wanted truth and what you think I think fascism is and isn't its all in painful public and brutal DETAIL. THINK ABOUT THIS CAREFULLY.
I am also going to add a conjecture are you using AI to attempt to give me the definition of fascism? Because allow me to enlighten you on some facts I study a man's works called on socialism AND omnipotent government and he economically, morally, and empirically breaks down the flaws of the systems in defense of liberalism. Fascism is still Fascism regardless of what you think the definition can or should be. If you actually care a whit about the state of society as well as the US government instead of actually arguing with me perhaps you should take a closer look at my own channel.
With that being said I have no further use for people attempting to attack me on the definition of fascism when it is clear to me that a 100 year old world war 2 veteran has called us a fascist state. AGAIN if you don't want me to use caps and yell at you? Perhaps you should listen and start reading ACTUAL books instead of quoting me the definitions of the what such regimes and governmental systems are. I do also read about political science EXTENSIVELY and have a deeper appreciation of liberalism. Not that I expect you to actually understand what liberalism is considering you don't even know what fascism is perhaps you are the one that should be going back to school on the subject thank you.
Parliamentary systems do not make judiciary “subordinate” to their parliament. Many of them do a much better job of keeping the judiciary politcally independent than US.
Valid point.
this is a painful truth that people need to realize the supreme court should not ever be governed by partisan quackery the problems we have in the US is that if a democratic majority wins they would likely just pack the courts with democratic stooges and this sets an entirely same problem that we are currently dealing with right now from conservatives. Politics isn't he did this so I must do this its about political compromise and understanding that you never get everything you ever want out of a system. Governments just simply do not work that way.
Yes, indeed.
As a reminder to the DSA, all politics are local. NYC and Seattle are not Little Rock, Charleston, Newark, Phoenix or even Los Angeles and Chicago.
back in the 1860s and after the civil war of north america the political left engaged with progressivism with the rise of teddy roosevelt and much of the policies aimed at bettering the world. Back in the 1780s and prior to the civil war the political party known as the federalist party collapsed and reformed. The United States and liberalism should never be afraid of such changes to its public policy. Socialism with its poison fruits should be held aloft and explored as a cognitive disadvantage however complete total pluralism is a dying trait in today's society with its massive populations. I would argue that progressivism with centrist ideologies is the new way forward. Liberalism is the freedom of expression and perhaps compromise and political survival is the only new way forward.
I would argue that perhaps liberalism needs to be shaken up and reformed under the idea of "post liberalism." The concept of taking liberalism to its radical ends utterly. Freedom with rule of law and expressionism of pursuit of happiness. History is the byproduct of our own mistakes and we must realize the cost of not exploring it at any point.
Perhaps good change is coming or not. I will say this much the idea that liberalism is dead is not going to happen to me. I will fight and continue defending the political ideology of liberalism by counteracting the absurdity of the other ideologies. Authoritarianism in my mind has an expiration date and sooner or later they all fall down.
What Democrat has endorsed the DSA platform? Surely many Democrats are called socialists and some democrats describe themselves as Democratic socialists, but I have heard none espouse this platform. Am I not listening close enough?
I don't agree with many of the economic or social policies championed by the DSA, but I welcome new ideas on structural political reform. Is it really a "scary possibility" to have a political system where the judicial and legislative functions are subordinate to a supreme legislative institution? Are Australia, Canada, or the UK totalitarian states?
And is our constitutional system really something worth defending in its current form? Right now, we fail to deliver capable governance or really any coherent policymaking in the national interest. Public faith in democracy is eroding quickly. An authoritarian and manifestly unfit demagogue has captured the executive. I suspect the structure of our constitutional system, with its inefficiencies and veto points, is partially to blame. Those interested in the preservation of democracy for the long haul should welcome a conversation on its repair.
For my part, I think there is a lot we could within the confines of the current constitutional order. E.g., limit judicial review, move to a national popular vote for President, limit the role of the Senate and streamline legislative rules, and of course getting money of out politics. But the ideas championed here by DSA are far less threatening to basic human liberty than those entertained by JD Vance (an admitted reader of neo-fascist/monarchist writer Curtis Yarvin).
I see the DSA as doing the essential democratic work of formulating alternatives to the status quo and making a case for serious change. Whether you agree with the specifics of their proposals or not, what I think is inarguable is that we need a conversation in this country about major structural changes to the Constitution and our governing institutions. It has been almost 240 years since the Constitution was written; Mr Lane may be right that it has served us well and should be defended, but it is not holy writ. Other constitutions in other countries have changed radically with time while ours has been shut in a time capsule. Americans by and large no longer see the people and institutions produced to lead us under the Constitution as trustworthy; they see them as self-serving, corrupt, and in thrall to wealthy patrons. And they’re right. As Lampedusa tells us in The Leopard: “If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change.”
The DSA should be asking themselves what voters want, not what they want. If they takeover the Democratic Party it will simply confirm my decision to emigrate 5 years ago. I would never vote for a party the DSA controls. So I just won't bother voting anymore until there is a party that reflects my values and beliefs.
the problem with this statement is that voters did vote for this and centrist democrats are losing because they are not listening to what voter's actually want. Look if you despise socialism then maybe ask a voter in those areas what they are looking at because people on both sides of the political spectrum are tired of the posturing and capitulating to gigantic corporate donors backing the political party that is "supposed" to represent the working class. When both parties have stopped listening to the voter base you might want to ask yourselves why?
Color me cynical but Americans have recently elected a grotesque con man who told them he would address their real concerns. Has he? You wouldn't know it from any of the current economic numbers. Yet many refuse to hold him accountable because to do so would be to admit they fell for a swindler. I fear the same kind of con artists on the radical Left. There are undoubtedly people of good will there but I think in the end they will be useful tools for those interested only in power. I am a Social Democrat with the emphasis on Democrat. I want an end to income inequality, an expanded welfare state, and a move away from an "I" and back toward a "we" society. The DSA are Democratic Socialists with an emphasis on Socialism. I think their leaders have fallen for the modern "hermeneutic of suspicion" that suggests it's all about power and how to keep it. Unfortunately, I know whereof I speak. My mother's entire family died in Stalin's gulags at the hands of people who allegedly wanted to create "the workers' paradise" but in the end reduced the whole country to a vast prison for scores of millions of people to preserve their absolute power. I would consider supporting the DSA when they convince me they are more about the general welfare than in accumulating and holding power. They need to commit to a democratic political order of one man, one vote.
When the political left entangled itself with identity politics and continued going down the rabbit hole of buying into it Rural Americans literally wrote the WHOLE PARTY off as a lost cause. When Hilary Clinton literally attacked half the voter base by calling them all white supremacists then you guys wonder precisely WHY YOU LOST? Why would you ever be surprised that somebody like Donald Trump won? He ran on the platform of promising to upend the entire establishment.
Here is another tragedy that you seem to not take into account. The educational systems established by government itself have been completely eroded and destroyed by the establishment government. The whole reason we are in this mess is BECAUSE OF GOVERNMENT. I don't know about you but when you tangle with anarchy why would you ever be surprised its not going to come? I know precisely the horrors of the "far left". I have studied the rise and fall of dictators and trust me every single one of them always has an end point. In the case of the US I am not seeing the left attempt to repair any of the bridges that they have burned with half the population simply because you call out American's as "dumb".
The truest tragedy of our state of politics is that both sides have attempted to take us into an authoritarian end point and people from all walks of life are literally fed up with it in general. NEWS FLASH: This is globally happening everywhere with AI and data centers nearly every government alongside China AND THE US want to take this insane warped thought to its overall conclusion with AI. You worry about authoritarianism? NO I worry about universal anarchy because these fools and us are tangling with the similarity of a planet buster nuke and several of them being made daily by companies with zero understanding of the "science".
I would rather prefer liberalism as a free thought experiment and representative governmental systems to keep society from collapsing into complete and total chaos. If you have any better options then what you are posting I am all ears but trust me americans are absolutely DISGUSTED with both parties and I am of the mind that anarchy will be coming in 5 years time because you just don't get it.