Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

New book "Tyranny of the Minority: Why American Democracy Reached the Breaking Point"

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by cocodrilo, Dec 9, 2023.

Page 1 of 8
  1. Dec 9, 2023 #1
    cocodrilo

    cocodrilo GC Hall of Fame

    16,531
    938
    1,708
    Apr 8, 2007
    This book makes a lot of sense. As we all know, on the left and the right and in between, the U.S. Congress, now almost dysfunctional, is chockful of what the book calls “ambitious careerists.” Politicians who go along to get along (except nowadays getting along with each other), even if it means killing democracy.

    From the article:

    (The book) argues that the US must reform its Constitution and political institutions because they are dangerously antiquated…. Schools often teach children that the Founding Fathers were political geniuses in powdered wigs who created a democratic system that remains envied throughout the world. But the “Tyranny of the Minority” makes another argument: The Founding Fathers didn’t intend to create what contemporary Americans would call a democracy….

    “Many of the politicians who preside over a democracy’s collapse are just ambitious careerist trying to stay in office or perhaps win a higher one,” they write. “They do not oppose democracy out of deep-seated principle but are merely indifferent to it. They tolerate or condone antidemocratic extremism because it is the path of least resistance. These politicians often tell themselves they are doing what’s necessary to get ahead. But, ultimately, they become indispensable partners in democracy’s demise.“

    A group of political ‘assassins’ is quietly threatening American democracy, a new book says | CNN
     
    • Informative Informative x 4
    • Like Like x 2
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  2. Dec 9, 2023 #2
    rivergator

    rivergator Too Hot Mod Moderator VIP Member

    35,185
    1,719
    2,258
    Apr 8, 2007
    Pretty fascinating line from one of the authors:

     
    • Like Like x 3
  3. Dec 9, 2023 #3
    Trickster

    Trickster VIP Member

    9,767
    2,382
    3,233
    Sep 20, 2014
    Great post. The sad thing is, many, including some posters here, don't fully appreciate how dangerous to democracy the current situation is. On the other hand, perhaps they do appreciate it and want a dictatorship lead by their dictator.

    Interestingly, I commented to a friend yesterday that the Constitution is antiquated! As examples, I referred to the electoral college and the second amendment.
     
    • Agree x 4
    • Like x 1
    • Dislike x 1
    • Disagree Bacon! x 1
    • Winner x 1
  4. Dec 9, 2023 #4
    duggers_dad

    duggers_dad GC Hall of Fame

    15,770
    1,163
    2,088
    Jan 5, 2022
    Certain of the Founders favored importing a monarch. In any case, both sides of my family being Loyalists means I have a more nuanced perspective on the so-called Revolutionary War than others.
     
  5. Dec 9, 2023 #5
    tampagtr

    tampagtr VIP Member

    17,522
    2,765
    1,618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Sandy Levinson has been writing for years about the structural flaws in our Constitution that threaten to doom us. It feels almost inevitable at this point, which despairs me.

     
    • Dislike Dislike x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  6. Dec 9, 2023 #6
    swampbabe

    swampbabe GC Hall of Fame

    3,655
    915
    2,643
    Apr 8, 2007
    Viera, FL
    This guy puts out some very thought provoking content.

    TikTok - Make Your Day

    He’s a history professor at Johns Hopkins
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  7. Dec 9, 2023 #7
    homer

    homer GC Hall of Fame

    2,588
    800
    2,078
    Nov 2, 2015

    It’s only antiquated because it doesn’t fit your leftist progressive agenda.

    I like it just as it is. If it’s ever changed we become just another socialist country without any personal protections. And most states will lose their voice allowing a concentration of city dwellers to decide what’s right for all.

    The new Amerika
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Dec 9, 2023 #8
    rivergator

    rivergator Too Hot Mod Moderator VIP Member

    35,185
    1,719
    2,258
    Apr 8, 2007
    I don't think that's fair. The idea that each person's vote is equal is hardly limited to 'leftist progressive agenda.'

    Edit - At least it shouldn't be.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Dec 9, 2023 #9
    mdgator05

    mdgator05 Premium Member

    15,649
    2,011
    1,718
    Dec 9, 2010
    So you prefer that only a few hundred thousand people in a few states matter in picking a President just to make sure that people in New York and LA don't matter? Why should wear you live make a difference in how much you matter?
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
  10. Dec 9, 2023 #10
    homer

    homer GC Hall of Fame

    2,588
    800
    2,078
    Nov 2, 2015

    This is fair when you know the reason behind it. It’s not a secret.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. Dec 9, 2023 #11
    rivergator

    rivergator Too Hot Mod Moderator VIP Member

    35,185
    1,719
    2,258
    Apr 8, 2007
    Can we also say that you only want to keep it the way it is because of your rightist regressive agenda?
     
    • Like x 2
    • Agree x 2
    • Best Post Ever x 2
    • Funny x 1
    • Winner x 1
    • Wish I would have said that x 1
  12. Dec 9, 2023 #12
    swampbabe

    swampbabe GC Hall of Fame

    3,655
    915
    2,643
    Apr 8, 2007
    Viera, FL
    You prefer tyranny of the minority because it advances your agenda.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Like Like x 1
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
  13. Dec 9, 2023 #13
    homer

    homer GC Hall of Fame

    2,588
    800
    2,078
    Nov 2, 2015
    And why should they control the presidency and representation? I don’t think states with large cities should carry that much power. We all know why the electoral college exists. The change would eliminate the reason to vote for many states and rural areas.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. Dec 9, 2023 #14
    swampbabe

    swampbabe GC Hall of Fame

    3,655
    915
    2,643
    Apr 8, 2007
    Viera, FL
    Since when did you become a constitutional and early American history scholar?
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  15. Dec 9, 2023 #15
    duggers_dad

    duggers_dad GC Hall of Fame

    15,770
    1,163
    2,088
    Jan 5, 2022
    I still favor the Balkanization of the U.S. And I’ll bet the Founders wouldn’t laugh me out of the room at this point.
     
  16. Dec 9, 2023 #16
    homer

    homer GC Hall of Fame

    2,588
    800
    2,078
    Nov 2, 2015

    Absolutely.
    Call it what you want.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Dec 9, 2023 #17
    swampbabe

    swampbabe GC Hall of Fame

    3,655
    915
    2,643
    Apr 8, 2007
    Viera, FL
    We can also lift the cap on the House of Reps (set in 1929) and make electoral votes proportional instead of winner take all. Nebraska and Maine currently do this.

    A Republican candidate for president has won the popular vote one time in the last 35 years.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. Dec 9, 2023 #18
    homer

    homer GC Hall of Fame

    2,588
    800
    2,078
    Nov 2, 2015

    If me wanting states to carry weight in the election as the electoral college requires then yes, call it tyranny. I’ll call it America.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
  19. Dec 9, 2023 #19
    homer

    homer GC Hall of Fame

    2,588
    800
    2,078
    Nov 2, 2015

    Never
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  20. Dec 9, 2023 #20
    rivergator

    rivergator Too Hot Mod Moderator VIP Member

    35,185
    1,719
    2,258
    Apr 8, 2007
    because every person should have the same power.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 2
    • Winner Winner x 2
Page 1 of 8