Why we're screwed
October 30, 2012 12:52 AM Subscribe
Why the American political system is so dysfunctional today "But what is most striking is that in a presidential system, the legislators, especially when they represent cohesive, disciplined parties that offer clear ideological and political alternatives, can also claim democratic legitimacy. This claim is thrown into high relief when a majority of the legislature represents a political option opposed to the one the president represents. Under such circumstances, who has the stronger claim to speak on behalf of the people: the president or the legislative majority that opposes his policies? Since both derive their power from the votes of the people in a free competition among well-defined alternatives, a conflict is always possible and at times may erupt dramatically. There is no democratic principle on the basis of which it can be resolved, and the mechanisms the constitution might provide are likely to prove too complicated and aridly legalistic to be of much force in the eyes of the electorate."
Paul Krugman on stimulus back in 2009 "This really does look like a plan that falls well short of what advocates of strong stimulus were hoping for — and it seems as if that was done in order to win Republican votes. Yet even if the plan gets the hoped-for 80 votes in the Senate, which seems doubtful, responsibility for the plan’s perceived failure, if it’s spun that way, will be placed on Democrats."
Also more good stuff out there on this from bloggers Kevin Drum, Ta-Nehsisi Coates, and Matthew Yglesias, with the latter two being particularly good if you want to understand the historical role race plays in all of this. This Drum post about the book It's Even Worse Than It Looks is particularly good. More stuff, particularly from TNC, may be added later but right now it's late and I'm tired.
Paul Krugman on stimulus back in 2009 "This really does look like a plan that falls well short of what advocates of strong stimulus were hoping for — and it seems as if that was done in order to win Republican votes. Yet even if the plan gets the hoped-for 80 votes in the Senate, which seems doubtful, responsibility for the plan’s perceived failure, if it’s spun that way, will be placed on Democrats."
Also more good stuff out there on this from bloggers Kevin Drum, Ta-Nehsisi Coates, and Matthew Yglesias, with the latter two being particularly good if you want to understand the historical role race plays in all of this. This Drum post about the book It's Even Worse Than It Looks is particularly good. More stuff, particularly from TNC, may be added later but right now it's late and I'm tired.
This post was deleted for the following reason: Election season is almost over, but right now we still have a very high bar for posts related to U.S. politics. Maybe re-compose this into a post with a bit more depth and focus when you are rested? -- goodnewsfortheinsane
"...especially when they represent cohesive, disciplined parties that offer clear ideological and political alternatives..."
I can't believe someone can type that with a straight face. Both major parties, and their cronies, are virtually identical when it comes to Wall Street, the wars in the Mideast, the drug war, domestic attacks on civil liberty...what's the difference?
posted by dickfitz2 at 1:15 AM on October 30, 2012
I can't believe someone can type that with a straight face. Both major parties, and their cronies, are virtually identical when it comes to Wall Street, the wars in the Mideast, the drug war, domestic attacks on civil liberty...what's the difference?
posted by dickfitz2 at 1:15 AM on October 30, 2012
« Older Just taking a video. | Rendezvous with Neptune Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
I suggest you re-post this along with the missing links after you wake up. You've got some interesting stuff here, but this is incomplete. What does TNC have to say?
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 1:13 AM on October 30, 2012