this post was submitted on 27 Apr 2025
401 points (95.1% liked)

politics

23191 readers
2924 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

"But over time, the executive branch grew exceedingly powerful. Two world wars emphasized the president’s commander in chief role and removed constraints on its power. By the second half of the 20th century, the republic was routinely fighting wars without its legislative branch, Congress, declaring war, as the Constitution required. With Congress often paralyzed by political conflict, presidents increasingly governed by edicts."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Forester@pawb.social 22 points 19 hours ago (2 children)

By contrast to literally every other country. Yes very much in that time period. Believe it or not, most monarchies were also completely fine with slavery and plantations. And their citizens had even less political power.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 10 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

By contrast to literally every other country.

One of the proximate causes of the American Revolution was British abolitionism leaking into colonial politics.

You had ex-military ultra-wealth planation owners defecting to the revolution in drovers following Dunmore's Proclamation.

most monarchies were also completely fine with slavery and plantations

They were completely fine with collecting rents off their subjects - slave or free. But quite a few of them had strong reservations against chattel slavery (the Spanish Catholics, most notably). And more simply could not stomach the expense of policing transatlantic trade from piracy.

That is what ultimately lead to the outlawing of the practice across Europe.

[–] libra00@lemmy.world 2 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

Democracy isn't defined relative to other countries. Only property-owners could vote, and only white men could own property, so that means the vast majority of the population couldn't vote. That doesn't sound like a democracy to me, that sounds like an aristocracy. I will grant you it was more democratic than monarchies and such, but even some of them (like the UK) had a parliamentary system so the king's power wasn't universal. They were deeply unequal, of course, but that's just the pot calling the kettle black, because so was (and is) the US.

[–] Forester@pawb.social 1 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago) (2 children)

Yes because if it isn't perfect may as well not even try.

I'm sure glad that United States never decided to split away from England and was unable to influence the entirety of Western democracy to form.

Without USA, you never get the French revolution as Thomas Paine never publish common sense without French revolution. You don't get free France without free France. You don't have European democracy.

[–] futatorius@lemm.ee 2 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Thomas Paine never publish common sense without French revolution

The French Revolution in 1789. Paine published Common Sense in 1776.

Paine was also involved in the French revolution, but the Jacobins threw him into the Bastille because he was opposed in principle to capital punishment, so refused to vote to execute the king.

[–] Forester@pawb.social 1 points 7 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago)

The pitfalls of typing things on your phone at work is that sometimes when you mean to say American revolution, you write French revolution twice because you're only commenting while you're waiting for something to happen at work and not giving your phone your full attention.

[–] libra00@lemmy.world 0 points 15 hours ago

Yes because if it isn’t perfect may as well not even try.

Do you have to try to be that disingenuous or does it come natural?

What a thing is trying to be is pretty irrelevant to what it is. A wife-beater can talk all he wants about how hard he's trying to stop beating his wife, but meanwhile she's got a fresh supply of new bruises every day. Whether or not he's trying to stop, what he's doing is beating his wife, so is he a wife-beater or is he a changed man? Here's a hint in case it's not as obvious to you as it is to everyone else: he's still a wife-beater, but that doesn't mean he should stop trying to change.

The fact that the US talked a big game about democracy does not make it a democracy, but that also doesn't mean it should've stop trying to become one.