How are you feeling about the state of American democracy?

[dismalist]

Trump and his Republican allies tried to overturn the results of a free and fair election

Clearly, a bunch of incompetents. Hardly any police defense and the rioters can't even usurp a government when their allies are sitting in the chamber. I am not shaking in my boots.

Argue the case(s) to the voters. Repeating "Trump" and "disparity" gets one only so far with the electorate.

[Ruralguy]

Perhaps there was no real danger of them actually staging a successful coup, in the sense of maintaining power beyond a few moments of confusion, but I think there was real danger of attacking and killing Pence or Romney and perhaps also some democrats or just anyone the rabble had come across. I think if either of those had happened, we'd be even more scared for our democracy now. Partly, I am worried that exactly that will happen in Coup 2.0. Maybe not a takeover, but more damage, more killing, more claims of an invalid election taken seriously.   Then, maybe 3.0 will be the real deal. I am wary of people who claim "it can't happen here" or various revised versions of that statement.

[dismalist]

The March on Rome this was not.

[downer]

Given how many guns there are in the US and the levels of political rhetoric, I am surprised every day that there isn't considerably more political violence than there is.

[Ruralguy]

It was what it was. But it was pretty bad.

[mamselle]

The more info that comes in, the clearer it is that planning was not random or bottom-up only.

We will get past it safely only by taking it for the serious effort it was, and meting out consequences appropriately.

If that happens, we stand a chance.

If not, we're in trouble.

I'm hopeful we can get an incisive, clear report and reasonable action on the results.

But failing that, we'd do well to be worried.

My folks thought Nixon was just fine. For me, this is Lombardi's 《deja-vu all over again,》only much worse.

M.

[dismalist]

The March on Rome this was not.

Actually, it was a Schildbürgerstreich, an act of monumental dim-wittedness.

[Sun_Worshiper]

Dismalist will never accept that there is a problem. Even if Republicans are successful next time in overturning the results of an election he will give some glib response about the founders and a smiley face. The normalization of political violence is a-ok with him. The lies about voter fraud and the idiotic conspiracy theories that have overtaken the Republican party are not a thing worth even mentioning. In his mind, there is no problem - it is all good.

[quasihumanist]

Some of you think that government by a majority is qualitatively better than government by a minority, that there is something special about 50.1%.

I think government should ideally be by consensus, and the difference between government by 50.1% and government by 49.9% is exactly the same as the difference between government by 49.9% and government by 49.7%.

By that standard, we are in deep trouble, and have been in deep trouble for years, because no matter what there is a significant minority that refuses to compromise, so we cannot get government by anything close to 100%.

[Parasaurolophus]

Dismalist will never accept that there is a problem. Even if Republicans are successful next time in overturning the results of an election he will give some glib response about the founders and a smiley face. The normalization of political violence is a-ok with him. The lies about voter fraud and the idiotic conspiracy theories that have overtaken the Republican party are not a thing worth even mentioning. In his mind, there is no problem - it is all good.

If the demand for democracy is high enough, voters are free to vote with their feet! =-p

[dismalist]

Dismalist will never accept that there is a problem. Even if Republicans are successful next time in overturning the results of an election he will give some glib response about the founders and a smiley face. The normalization of political violence is a-ok with him. The lies about voter fraud and the idiotic conspiracy theories that have overtaken the Republican party are not a thing worth even mentioning. In his mind, there is no problem - it is all good.

If the demand for democracy is high enough, voters are free to vote with their feet! =-p

That sort of thing actually works somewhat for sub-national units, at least in the United States. Alas, it doesn't work well among countries.

That's almost number three, Para! But you deserve a [small] break on this one. :-)

[mahagonny]

Some of you think that government by a majority is qualitatively better than government by a minority, that there is something special about 50.1%.

I think government should ideally be by consensus, and the difference between government by 50.1% and government by 49.9% is exactly the same as the difference between government by 49.9% and government by 49.7%.

By that standard, we are in deep trouble, and have been in deep trouble for years, because no matter what there is a significant minority that refuses to compromise, so we cannot get government by anything close to 100%.

'237 years ago, on July 4, 1776, the Declaration of Independence was adopted by the 13 colonies to affirm that governments are constituted to secure natural, individual rights and that they "deriv[e] their just powers from the consent of the governed."

And, that "whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government."'



Which people? The January 6 'insurgents' believed they were following the instructions in the constitution. Why trust the media after the 'Russian collusion' saga?

[marshwiggle]

Dismalist will never accept that there is a problem.

I don't think that's the case. I take dismalist's responses as a reminder that situations like this, even though they are disturbing, are basically "noise and fury, signifying nothing". Seriously, how many people a year after the event think it was a good idea? And there's no sign whatsoever of it having brought about anything substantial.

The Arab Spring, it wasn't. And even that had a lot less long term impact than expected.

Some of you think that government by a majority is qualitatively better than government by a minority, that there is something special about 50.1%.

I think government should ideally be by consensus, and the difference between government by 50.1% and government by 49.9% is exactly the same as the difference between government by 49.9% and government by 49.7%.

By that standard, we are in deep trouble, and have been in deep trouble for years, because no matter what there is a significant minority that refuses to compromise, so we cannot get government by anything close to 100%.

Absolutely. As long as everything is viewed in tribal terms of winners and losers, rather than in terms of what kind of changes are good for society, regardless of whose "side" they're from, I don't see a way out.

[Sun_Worshiper]

Dismalist will never accept that there is a problem.

I don't think that's the case. I take dismalist's responses as a reminder that situations like this, even though they are disturbing, are basically "noise and fury, signifying nothing". Seriously, how many people a year after the event think it was a good idea? And there's no sign whatsoever of it having brought about anything substantial.

The Arab Spring, it wasn't. And even that had a lot less long term impact than expected.

Some of you think that government by a majority is qualitatively better than government by a minority, that there is something special about 50.1%.

I think government should ideally be by consensus, and the difference between government by 50.1% and government by 49.9% is exactly the same as the difference between government by 49.9% and government by 49.7%.

By that standard, we are in deep trouble, and have been in deep trouble for years, because no matter what there is a significant minority that refuses to compromise, so we cannot get government by anything close to 100%.

Absolutely. As long as everything is viewed in tribal terms of winners and losers, rather than in terms of what kind of changes are good for society, regardless of whose "side" they're from, I don't see a way out.

Most Republican politicians refuse to say that Biden won the election and that Trump lost. Republicans at the state level are, in some cases, giving themselves permission to reject the vote count in their states and send their own set of electors to Congress. Most Republican voters believe there was massive voter fraud in the election. These are serious repercussions - not of January 6th, specifically, but of the conspiracy theories and lies that have overtaken one party in the two party system and that led up to January 6th. In general there is an overemphasis on the riot and an underemphasize on the lies that created it.

It is also important to acknowledge that there was a concerted political effort by Trump and his allies to overturn the results of the election by pressuring VP to reject electors, demanding that governors "find votes," and pressuring officials to vote against certifying results. It is good that this did not work this time, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't be concerned that it will work in the future (or that Democrats will try to do the same thing).

[marshwiggle]

It is also important to acknowledge that there was a concerted political effort by Trump and his allies to overturn the results of the election by pressuring VP to reject electors, demanding that governors "find votes," and pressuring officials to vote against certifying results. It is good that this did not work this time, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't be concerned that it will work in the future (or that Democrats will try to do the same thing).

Has everyone forgotten all of the whining about the electoral college, that Clinton won the popular vote and so "should" be president, etc.? That was only ONE election ago!!!!!

BOTH sides need to grow up and respect the process.