Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

by Original Quill Fri Jun 25, 2021 4:54 pm

Attorney General Merrick Garland has announced that the United States has just filed suit against the State of Georgia for its recently enacted Jim Crow voter suppression law. Georgia, led by a legislature and governor who are Republican, experienced a spike in black voting in the 2020 election, resulting in both Senators from the state becoming Democratic. The draconian law, written in three days, preys upon limiting mail-in voting, restricting voter precincts in black neighborhoods, and prohibits Churches and organizations providing food and water to those in line, when the very line of voters is the result of reduced precincts in black neighborhoods.

Then, as if Republicans felt unsure they had cheated enough, they wrote a provision saying that upon any complaint, the state Legislature may determine for themselves (ie, the Republicans) who won the election. These provisions apply to federal, as well as state elections. What they have done is precisely what is done in Russia and other third-world countries...take control of the process, and eliminate ballot counting from the algorithm, deciding the winner for themselves.

The Constitution provides for a democratic form of government. The US AG contends that Georgia has violated that, as well as remaining provisions of the '64 Voting Rights Act.

by Ben Reilly Sat Jun 26, 2021 11:08 pm

I honestly believe these people would ban the Democratic Party if they could. They now fully realize that the majority of America is not on their side, and they'll not win another fair fight for a long time.

These people are weird -- I had a friend at university, back around 1995, who was a Christian Right-style Republican, and I asked her if she'd be in favor of a theoretical machine that would make everyone believe the way she does. She couldn't understand why I found it horrifying that she thought such a machine would be a wonderful thing.

They have a real tendency to think they have all the answers, all the solutions, and the problems in the world are that other people won't just fall in line with them.

by Maddog Sun Jun 27, 2021 3:36 am

There isn't really anything in Georgia's voting laws that aren't already in place in many other states.

People who have an ID have a couple or weeks to go vote. If that's too much trouble, I'm not sure you are cut out for this whole voting thing.

by Original Quill Sun Jun 27, 2021 4:57 pm

Ben Reilly wrote:I honestly believe these people would ban the Democratic Party if they could. They now fully realize that the majority of America is not on their side, and they'll not win another fair fight for a long time.

These people are weird -- I had a friend at university, back around 1995, who was a Christian Right-style Republican, and I asked her if she'd be in favor of a theoretical machine that would make everyone believe the way she does. She couldn't understand why I found it horrifying that she thought such a machine would be a wonderful thing.

They have a real tendency to think they have all the answers, all the solutions, and the problems in the world are that other people won't just fall in line with them.

Truth is, there is 'cause' right now for banning the Republican Party. They have criminalized themselves. From Trump on down, they are engaged in a conspiracy against the US.

Put aside espionage and sedition laws, the Constitution, Article IV, section 4, guarantees a representative government, and requires every State to conform. This is what they are trying to undo by Jim Crow voter restriction laws. A pact to go against the Constitution – particularly insofar as it addresses the form of government - is a conspiracy against the US.

What Georgia, and your state Ben, Texas, are trying to create is called an oligarchy (form of power structure in which power rests with a small number of people), specifically one that is built around white supremacy. It all stems from slavery, at the core of southern culture.

Thank heaven the Democrats in the Texas Legislature have the decency to walk out, and thereby deny the Republicans a quorum.

by Maddog Sun Jun 27, 2021 5:01 pm

Which part of the Georgia law do people on here find to be more problematic for one party over another in terms of voting?

by Original Quill Sun Jun 27, 2021 5:48 pm

The parts of the law that disenfranchise black voters are probably the most obvious and directly offensive.

But structurally, the provision that says the Legislature can reach in and take control away from the Secretary of State (the tabulator) to determine for themselves who which candidate is selected, is most offensive to a representative form of government. It is oligarchy, plain and simple.

That's my opinion...but my real druthers are that we (the US) rid ourselves, once and for all, of the whole Jim Crow gambit. Because the southern culture is white supremacy through and through, these games will crop up every time that otherism becomes an issue.

Only Texas and Florida carry their weight among southern states. The rest of them come crying to California (or Illinois/New York) to pay for their sustenance, either directly, or through the federal system. Cut them loose, then they can either change their minds, or sail away. Either way, we are not spending black lives, and/or the decent citizens’ taxpayer capital, to prop up their hillbilly false ideologies.

by Maddog Sun Jun 27, 2021 5:52 pm

Original Quill wrote:The parts of the law that disenfranchise black voters are probably the most obvious and directly offensive.

But structurally, the provision that says the Legislature can reach in and take control away from the Secretary of State (the tabulator) to determine for themselves who which candidate is selected, is most offensive to a representative form of government. It is oligarchy, plain and simple.

That's my opinion...but my real druthers are that we (the US) rid ourselves, once and for all, of the whole Jim Crow gambit. Because the southern culture is white supremacy through and through, these games will crop up every time that otherism becomes an issue.

Only Texas and Florida carry their weight among southern states. The rest of them come crying to California (or Illinois/New York) to pay for their sustenance, either directly, or through the federal system. Cut them loose, then they can either change their minds, or sail away. Either way, we are not spending black lives, and/or the decent citizens’ taxpayer capital, to prop up their hillbilly false ideologies.

Name the provision that is harder for Democrats to overcome than Republicans.

by Original Quill Sun Jun 27, 2021 6:24 pm

Maddog wrote:Name the provision that is harder for Democrats to overcome than Republicans.

I just did. Republicans are in control of the state. Republicans invoke provisions that say whomever is in control, shall stay in control forever. Republicans become an oligarchy, and by that means, stay in control forever. Self-perpetuation is the formula for all oligarchy.

That formula has been around since the invention of politics. It was the formula for Mesopotamia, the Pharaohs of Egypt, the Roman Empire, even the hereditary monarchs of Europe, who maintained their monopoly by ovarian selection. It’s still around today, in third-world nations and dictatorships…although their mo is lying, as we see happening with Republicans.

No one, including Democrats, can overcome it. But it's really not Democrats they are targeting; they are aiming at blacks, and trying to achieve white supremacy.

by Didgee Sun Jun 27, 2021 7:01 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:Name the provision that is harder for Democrats to overcome than Republicans.

I just did. Republicans are in control of the state. Republicans invoke provisions that say whomever is in control, shall stay in control forever. Republicans become an oligarchy, and by that means, stay in control forever. Self-perpetuation is the formula for all oligarchy.

That formula has been around since the invention of politics. It was the formula for Mesopotamia, the Pharaohs of Egypt, the Roman Empire, even the hereditary monarchs of Europe, who maintained their monopoly by ovarian selection. It’s still around today, in third-world nations and dictatorships…although their mo is lying, as we see happening with Republicans.

No one, including Democrats, can overcome it. But it's really not Democrats they are targeting; they are aiming at blacks, and trying to achieve white supremacy.

You seriously never learn do you quill?

This is the issue with the US

Its never been a united unified nation

Its always been based on political aspirations with one side claiming moral superiority

When you centre racism as your meaning to deny uniformity between groups

You are ensur9ing they will remain separate and not become as one

Its why the far right always loses on this but also the far left

They castigate people based on class, as you do Quill

You are two peas in a pod

by Original Quill Sun Jun 27, 2021 8:31 pm

The simple answer is contained in an apologue that I always use: the cops can't help the robbers. There can be no unity when there are direct, cross-purposes.

This assumes a code on which everyone agrees...when it comes to cops and robbers, it is the criminal code. That defines the line between cops and robbers, and thus the boundaries of any unity that they could have.

When it comes to the code of political formation, the unity is in the Constitution, Article IV, section 4. The Constitution allows only a representative, democratic form of government…on the federal level and on the state level.

When a state or party goes beyond that acceptable code, s/he goes outside the law. The Georgia law, and the one proposed by the State of Texas, are simply outside the law, contrary to the Constitution. That is the law of our formation.

If you still feel the same way, didge, and want to go outside the formation of the US government, why not support my proposal that the south be set adrift? That’s where the discord is. They have the disagreement with the Constitution. If they are going to rewrite the code, let them do it without us.

Do you see how reasonable I am being? I’m not proposing violence, or god forbid another civil war. I am not imposing anything on the south. Indeed, I’m being quite permissive and hands-off. I simply don’t want them to suddenly redraft the code, and and forget about us. Free, free, set them free...

Amexit. cheers

by Maddog Sun Jun 27, 2021 10:03 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:Name the provision that is harder for Democrats to overcome than Republicans.

I just did. Republicans are in control of the state. Republicans invoke provisions that say whomever is in control, shall stay in control forever. Republicans become an oligarchy, and by that means, stay in control forever. Self-perpetuation is the formula for all oligarchy.

That formula has been around since the invention of politics. It was the formula for Mesopotamia, the Pharaohs of Egypt, the Roman Empire, even the hereditary monarchs of Europe, who maintained their monopoly by ovarian selection. It’s still around today, in third-world nations and dictatorships…although their mo is lying, as we see happening with Republicans.

No one, including Democrats, can overcome it. But it's really not Democrats they are targeting; they are aiming at blacks, and trying to achieve white supremacy.

No you didn't. Name the provision of the law that is more problematic for members of one party than another.

by Original Quill Sun Jun 27, 2021 11:41 pm

Maddog wrote:No you didn't. Name the provision of the law that is more problematic for members of one party than another.

In Georgia? Senate Bill 202. The bill allows state legislative representatives, county commissioners or the State Elections Board itself to request an investigation of the county’s election’s superintendent. For some counties, that means replacing the probate judge, but in others, it means replacing an entire election board with a single individual.

Of course, malfeasance will typically be found if a black candidate is successful, and then it's up to the Legislature...which is, of course, Republican.

Vox wrote:Georgia’s restrictive new voting law, explained

The very worst provisions enable partisan Republicans to seize control of election boards in Democratic counties.

By Zack Beauchamp@zackbeauchampzack@vox.com Mar 26, 2021

Georgia’s new voting law, signed by Republican Gov. Brian Kemp on Thursday night, is a small-d democrat’s nightmare.

The bill, known as SB 202, gives state-level officials the authority to usurp the powers of county election boards — allowing the Republican-dominated state government to potentially disqualify voters in Democratic-leaning areas. It criminalizes the provision of food and water to voters waiting in line, in a state where lines are notoriously long in heavily nonwhite precincts. It requires ID for absentee ballots and limits the placement of ballot drop boxes.

Coming on the heels of President Trump’s potentially illegal campaign to pressure Georgia’s election officials into flipping the state into his column, the intent of the bill is clear: to wrest a state that’s increasingly trending blue back toward Republicans.

“This is anti-democratic,” says Cas Mudde, a political scientist at the University of Georgia. “It literally tries to undermine the one-person, one-vote principle that is at the core of democracy.”

SB 202 will almost certainly make elections less fair, giving the GOP a structural advantage well outsize to its actual strength among Georgia voters. It doesn’t signal the end of democracy in Georgia, but it is the latest significant step in the Republican Party’s move toward becoming an anti-democratic political faction.

The Georgia law is part of a broader wave of GOP efforts, at the state and national level, to undermine the fairness of American elections. What happened in Georgia reveals the true face of the modern Republican Party: a far-right institution that threatens American democracy even after Trump’s defeat.

The most important provisions in the Georgia bill are about who gets to run elections.

The most significant provisions in SB 202 don’t create new election rules, exactly. Instead, they change who gets to determine how those rules are implemented — handing significant power to the Republicans who control the state legislature, called the General Assembly.

“One of the worst aspects of the bill is the part making election administration even more partisan,” says Rick Hasen, an election law expert at UC Irvine. “That’s a move in exactly the wrong direction.”

Under current law, key issues in election management — including decisions on disqualifying ballots and voter eligibility — are made by county boards of election. The new law allows the State Board of Elections to determine that these county boards are performing poorly, replacing the entire board with an administrator chosen at the state level.

At the same time, the bill enhances the General Assembly’s control over the state board.

It removes Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican who famously stood up to Trump’s attempts to overturn the election results in Georgia, from his role as both chair and voting member of the board. The new chair would be appointed by the legislature, which already appoints two members of the five-person board — meaning that a full majority of the board will now be appointed by the Republican-dominated body.

To simplify: The state board, which now will be fully controlled by the Republican legislative majority, is unilaterally empowered to take over (among other things) the process of disqualifying ballots across the state. Given that Georgia Republicans have helped promote false allegations of voter fraud, it’s easy to see why handing them so much power over local election authorities is so worrying.

The greatest area of concern here for Democrats is Fulton County, home to Atlanta and a disproportionate number of Black voters. Republicans have baselessly alleged that this Democratic bastion was a major site of fraud, citing (among other things) a purported video of ballot-stuffing in the county. Though official investigations, court cases, and independent fact-checks found no evidence of such fraud — in the video or otherwise — the myth that it happened persists.

The new bill would allow Republicans to seize control of how elections are administered in Fulton County and other heavily Democratic areas, disqualifying voters and ballots as they see fit.

“I think the provision for state takeover of local election processes is a natural choice for a party whose election policy is driven by Trump’s ‘big lie,’” Josh McLaurin, a Democratic representative in the Georgia House of Representatives, tells me, referring to Trump’s baseless claims that the election was stolen. “By centralizing control over those processes, Republicans make their own manipulation easier while also removing a principal barrier to their lies.”

Other notable provisions in the bill include:

* Allowing any individual Georgian citizen to file an unlimited number of challenges to the eligibility of particular voters, effectively increasing the number of opportunities for newly centralized election authorities to exercise their powers to disqualify Democrats

* Imposing new limitations on ballot drop boxes that effectively ban their widespread deployment outside of a governor-declared emergency

* Applies voter ID laws to mail-in ballots by requiring voters to submit their driver’s license or state ID number as part of their vote-by-mail application. If they have neither number, they need to submit a photocopy or electronic image of an acceptable form of identification (e.g., a passport).

* Creating a fraud hotline that allows people to anonymously complain about allegedly fraudulent behavior at the polls

When you put all of that together, it’s fairly clear what this bill is designed to do: create barriers to voting that are most likely to affect voters who don’t have the time and resources to navigate them. In Georgia, as in most places, that’s low-income and minority voters — two disproportionately Democratic groups.

“It’s Jim Crow in a suit and tie,” writes Stacey Abrams, a voting rights advocate and the 2018 Democratic candidate for governor in Georgia. “Cutting off access, adding restrictions, encouraging more ‘show me your papers’ actions to challenge a citizen’s right to vote [is] facially neutral but racially targeted.”

https://www.vox.com/22352112/georgia-voting-sb-202-explained

In a democracy, voting should be the cardinal of all rights. The ability of the people to vote and select who leads them, and who does not, is the cure for any wrongdoing, or indeed, any wrong direction. Here, the southern state relegates voting (in those counties affected) to the status of refuse.

It’s a two-step process: First, in those neighborhoods where Democrats reside (blacks, students, simple workers, Hispanics, etc.) they limit poll sites, hours, and any assistance given to those in the inevitable long lines resulting from limiting polls and hours. Second, once the polling is complete, and the winning candidate is determined by honest means not to be of their party, they have a back door by which they allow their own party to choose the actual winner. In short, they rig the system.

It's a circuitous, but certain way to dictatorship. It takes all the assurances that the people shall rule, and makes a grand show of democracy, but then negates those assurances one by one. It makes a pretext of democracy, but then it takes it away, laying bare a structure of dictatorship. This is the formula of Jim Crow: show and tell a good thing, but then take it all away and reveal, in reality, a bad thing.

by Maddog Mon Jun 28, 2021 4:29 pm

So your problem with this bill is one set of elected officials will have the power to remove unelected officials?

That about it?

by Original Quill Mon Jun 28, 2021 7:04 pm

Maddog wrote:So your problem with this bill is one set of elected officials will have the power to remove unelected officials?

That about it?

No. The problem with this bill is one set of unelected officials will have the power to remove elected officials, and replace them with another set of unelected officials. This is the exact opposite of democratic rule.

by Maddog Mon Jun 28, 2021 8:36 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:So your problem with this bill is one set of elected officials will have the power to remove unelected officials?

That about it?

No. The problem with this bill is one set of unelected officials will have the power to remove elected officials, and replace them with another set of unelected officials. This is the exact opposite of democratic rule.

Sorta.

Who elects the county board in charge of elections?

by Original Quill Mon Jun 28, 2021 8:57 pm

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

No. The problem with this bill is one set of unelected officials will have the power to remove elected officials, and replace them with another set of unelected officials. This is the exact opposite of democratic rule.

Sorta.

Who elects the county board in charge of elections?

But that is a different office, unelected to the office of focus, be it governor, representative or senator, or any other office.

Republicans have spent years entrenching themselves into state office...particularly southern states. They are unpopular on the national level, and can only use tricks and lies to gain national office.

That is precisely why they are trying to un-democratize elections at the state level. They know they are unpopular, and diminishing in number, and this is the only way they can win. They hope it will escape notice.

In Georgia, Texas, Arizona and Florida, having achieved legislative majorities, but not for long, they are passing laws that hand power over to trusted Republican clerks/officers, who, it is anticipated, will usurp the will of future majorities and appoint their Republican favorites.

Tricks and lies...it's the only way an out-of-favor, minority party can gain a victory.

by Maddog Tue Jun 29, 2021 1:03 am

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:

Sorta.

Who elects the county board in charge of elections?

But that is a different office, unelected to the office of focus, be it governor, representative or senator, or any other office.

Republicans have spent years entrenching themselves into state office...particularly southern states. They are unpopular on the national level, and can only use tricks and lies to gain national office.

That is precisely why they are trying to un-democratize elections at the state level. They know they are unpopular, and diminishing in number, and this is the only way they can win. They hope it will escape notice.

In Georgia, Texas, Arizona and Florida, having achieved legislative majorities, but not for long, they are passing laws that hand power over to trusted Republican clerks/officers, who, it is anticipated, will usurp the will of future majorities and appoint their Republican favorites.

Tricks and lies...it's the only way an out-of-favor, minority party can gain a victory.

Are appointees OK to run elections or not?

by Original Quill Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:19 pm

Maddog wrote:Are appointees OK to run elections or not?

Leave off the "or not"...that's a redundancy.

Appointees are not democratic agents. In order to be democratic, a system must have equitably elected representatives, from whom the appointees, as functionaries, take their orders. You are describing a dictatorship, otherwise.

The idea of democracy is that the will of the people, as filtered through an electoral process, gets to prevail. The perversion of Georgia - and Texas, if they ever pass their Jim Crow law - is that Republicans, already a minority party in control, are trying to mold the electorate, rather than the electorate trying to mold the political apparatus. That's what voter suppression is all about. Otherwise, they will permanently sink into their minority status and lose future elections.

The idea of democracy is to make the people the agents, while government is supposed to be the functionary. When a political faction becomes so entrenched that it reverses that proposition, then you are returning to dictatorship...which we are supposed to have left behind, in the Old World. That's what our Revolution and Founding was all about.

Actually, today the party system has become confused with the underlying factions...notably racism in the south. Under our pluralistic system, white supremacists have taken over the Republican Party, and consequently blacks have flocked to the Democratic Party. So, we speak in terms of party labels. But the underlying faction determines the tone of the party, so that what we are really dealing with is racism in the south.

Southerners are appalled at the results of the 2020 elections. Their white supremacist president was ousted, and they lost the Senate with the surge of black voters. Southerners recognize that they need to suppress black voting in order for them to win.

That is true all over with Republicans…they are the minority party. So, the Republican Party has undertaken a program of suppressing the other guy’s vote – ie, the Democratic vote – because they don’t want to change to accommodate the public mood. Simply put, they don’t like losing, and they don’t want to change.

And that’s the problem with appointees. They are a part of the entrenched system, plotting to suppress the other guy’s vote as a means of making up for their own dwindling numbers. In the process, they are destroying our democratic legacy.

by Maddog Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:21 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:Are appointees OK to run elections or not?

Leave off the "or not"...that's a redundancy.

Appointees are not democratic agents. In order to be democratic, a system must have equitably elected representatives, from whom the appointees, as functionaries, take their orders. You are describing a dictatorship, otherwise.

The idea of democracy is that the will of the people, as filtered through an electoral process, gets to prevail. The perversion of Georgia - and Texas, if they ever pass their Jim Crow law - is that Republicans, already a minority party in control, are trying to mold the electorate, rather than the electorate trying to mold the political apparatus. Otherwise, they will permanently sink into their minority status and lose future elections.

The idea of democracy is to make the people the agents, while government is supposed to be the functionary. When a political faction becomes so entrenched that it reverses that proposition, then you are returning to dictatorship...which we are supposed to have left behind, in the Old World. That's what our Revolution and Founding was all about.

Actually, today the party system has become confused with the underlying factions...notably racism in the south. Under our pluralistic system, white supremacists have taken over the Republican Party, and consequently blacks have flocked to the Democratic Party. So, we speak in terms of party labels. But the underlying faction determines the tone of the party, so that what we are really dealing with is racism in the south.

Southerners are appalled at the results of the 2020 elections. Their white supremacist president was ousted, and they lost the Senate with the surge of black voters. Southerners recognize that they need to suppress black voting in order for them to win.

That is true all over with Republicans…they are the minority party. So, the Republican Party has undertaken a program of suppressing the other guy’s vote – ie, the Democratic vote – because they don’t want to change to accommodate the public mood. Simply put, they don’t like losing, and they don’t want to change.

And that’s the problem with appointees. They are a part of the entrenched system, plotting to suppress the other guy’s vote as a means of making up for their own dwindling numbers. In the process, they are destroying our democratic legacy.

So the county election boards are undemocratic?

by Original Quill Tue Jun 29, 2021 5:29 pm

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Leave off the "or not"...that's a redundancy.

Appointees are not democratic agents. In order to be democratic, a system must have equitably elected representatives, from whom the appointees, as functionaries, take their orders. You are describing a dictatorship, otherwise.

The idea of democracy is that the will of the people, as filtered through an electoral process, gets to prevail. The perversion of Georgia - and Texas, if they ever pass their Jim Crow law - is that Republicans, already a minority party in control, are trying to mold the electorate, rather than the electorate trying to mold the political apparatus. Otherwise, they will permanently sink into their minority status and lose future elections.

The idea of democracy is to make the people the agents, while government is supposed to be the functionary. When a political faction becomes so entrenched that it reverses that proposition, then you are returning to dictatorship...which we are supposed to have left behind, in the Old World. That's what our Revolution and Founding was all about.

Actually, today the party system has become confused with the underlying factions...notably racism in the south. Under our pluralistic system, white supremacists have taken over the Republican Party, and consequently blacks have flocked to the Democratic Party. So, we speak in terms of party labels. But the underlying faction determines the tone of the party, so that what we are really dealing with is racism in the south.

Southerners are appalled at the results of the 2020 elections. Their white supremacist president was ousted, and they lost the Senate with the surge of black voters. Southerners recognize that they need to suppress black voting in order for them to win.

That is true all over with Republicans…they are the minority party. So, the Republican Party has undertaken a program of suppressing the other guy’s vote – ie, the Democratic vote – because they don’t want to change to accommodate the public mood. Simply put, they don’t like losing, and they don’t want to change.

And that’s the problem with appointees. They are a part of the entrenched system, plotting to suppress the other guy’s vote as a means of making up for their own dwindling numbers. In the process, they are destroying our democratic legacy.

So the county election boards are undemocratic?

No, as long as they are equitably elected themselves, or in the control, and serve at the direction of the equitably elected representatives, they are democratically driven.

by Maddog Tue Jun 29, 2021 6:19 pm

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:

So the county election boards are undemocratic?

No, as long as they are equitably elected themselves, or in the control, and serve at the direction of the equitably elected representatives, they are democratically driven.

So appointees are OK again.

by Original Quill Tue Jun 29, 2021 7:24 pm

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

No, as long as they are equitably elected themselves, or in the control, and serve at the direction of the equitably elected representatives, they are democratically driven.

So appointees are OK again.

Was there a question? I think you were assuming an ‘either/or’ proposition. Assumption is the mother of all fook-ups. It’s more like a vertical proposition: in a democracy, an appointee is always subordinate to the elected position.

by Maddog Wed Jun 30, 2021 12:40 am

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:

So appointees are OK again.

Was there a question? I think you were assuming an ‘either/or’ proposition. Assumption is the mother of all fook-ups. It’s more like a vertical proposition: in a democracy, an appointee is always subordinate to the elected position.

Like the legislature?

by Original Quill Wed Jun 30, 2021 1:03 am

Maddog wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

Was there a question? I think you were assuming an ‘either/or’ proposition. Assumption is the mother of all fook-ups. It’s more like a vertical proposition: in a democracy, an appointee is always subordinate to the elected position.

Like the legislature?

Legislators are not appointees.

by Maddog Wed Jun 30, 2021 5:06 am

Original Quill wrote:
Maddog wrote:

Like the legislature?

Legislators are not appointees.

No, appointees are subordinate to them.

by Original Quill Wed Jun 30, 2021 3:52 pm

If you are interested in these subjects, take a look at the following:

https://www.ushistory.org/gov/1c.asp

It offers a quick précis.

For a more detailed history, try Wolin, Sheldon, Politics and Vision: Continuity and Innovation in Western Political Thought (1960, exp. 2016).

For a more critical view, try Kariel, Hans, Frontiers of Democratic Theory (1976). These are classics in the field of democratic theory.

by Maddog Wed Jun 30, 2021 4:14 pm

Original Quill wrote:If you are interested in these subjects, take a look at the following:

https://www.ushistory.org/gov/1c.asp

It offers a quick précis.

For a more detailed history, try Wolin, Sheldon, Politics and Vision: Continuity and Innovation in Western Political Thought (1960, exp. 2016).

For a more critical view, try Kariel, Hans, Frontiers of Democratic Theory (1976). These are classics in the field of democratic theory.

I'm good.

by Original Quill Thu Jul 01, 2021 4:24 pm

In searching for materials for your deeper understanding, I ran across this clip from another concerned site. It's a brilliant discussion of not only contemporary issues in the south, but has implications for political theories, particularly anarchy and libertarianism.

I'm struck by the thesis that much of RW activism today in America is brought on by antigovernment sentiments. This began after WWII and the Korean War, but back then it was bought out by liberal veteran benefits, such as higher education and generous housing.

But the antigovernment mood really took off after the Vietnam War, when people from both sides felt the government was or had betrayed them. Now, this antigoverment sentiment has evolved into distrust of a deep state (otherism? – alienation, at least) and has spawned events such as Charlottesville and the Washington insurrection of January 6th. Now, it stimulates distrust of democracy and the very founding values of the US, and results in states like Georgia, Florida and Texas focusing on undoing democracy itself. They seem to be throwing out the baby with the bath.

by Didgee Thu Jul 01, 2021 8:18 pm

By far leftism and far rightism are very similar in being anti-government

Its odd that you do not pick up on this when its coming from the middle class far left in the US as well Quill

What do you fail to see in slogans like defund the Police come rom?

Such slogans have in fact seen a massive rise in actual crime in US states

The anti-government mood has always been there in history

What you fail to see is that you are the one siding with those most privileged

The white middle class who are anarchists and Marxists

I mean are you claiming these groups are pro-government and Police?

by Original Quill Thu Jul 01, 2021 9:45 pm

Didgee wrote:By far leftism and far rightism are very similar in being anti-government

Its odd that you do not pick up on this when its coming from the middle class far left in the US as well Quill

* * * *

The anti-government mood has always been there in history

I think that's the point that we have been discussing. Yes, the antigovernment theme has been on both sides. But something is different this time: The RW has transformed antigovernment into antidemocracy. And what do you have when your aim is antidemocracy? Autocracy. Dictatorship. And what is Donald Trump trying to do by saying he won, despite not having the votes? Autocracy. Dictatorship.

The original liberalism in the US was as against a monarchy. But once that was agreed upon, a few went for no government altogether, and that is the source of the anarchy and libertarian strains of liberalism. But others, feeling some government is necessary, went for government by democracy. The will of the people should rule; the vote of the people should be decisive.

But RW antidemocracy takes us back full circle: once again we are flirting with a monarchy. They are arguing that a plurality of the vote is not decisive. Only - the myth of royalty being eliminated - this time the result is a simple dictatorship. That’s what it means when the Republicans get into power, and then shut the door...pass laws that say the votes of blacks, Hispanics and Democrats are suppressed? That's a dictatorship.

by Sponsored content

Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia

Re: Federal Government files voting rights suit against Georgia