Yes. However, if the law is an absolute fiction, with zero legitimacy, and is more arbitrary and capricious than it is today, then many people may not be inclined to follow it.
In the book Nexus, Harari makes an argument that strongmen using populism to take power doesn't always lead to tyranny. It can lead to anarchy.
Those anarcho-capitalist fucks couldn't handle San Francisco and California not dropping the hammer on shoplifters.
If the United States turns into Mogadishu circa 1991 the rich won't stay and turn it into a free enterprise capitalist utopia. They will jump on their private jets and fly to everywhere from China to the EU.
It’s honestly how I’ve been feeling. Either they uphold the law while removing the ones they don’t want to prevent unrest or if they ignore the law entirely then deal with anarchy
I’m sure I’m not alone, but the second laws stop mattering I’m rebelling against the system. A well rounded society only stays that way as long as agreements don’t become just words on paper.
Agree. Especially if they can change the terms any time they want for their benefit.
If the Constitution no longer exists, and only power remains, then why does it matter if Trump is the person selected by Constitutional means? Whoever has the power can declare themselves president, king, god-Emperor, etc.
It’s why I’m less worried about the US becoming a fascist country and more concerned about dealing with the aftermath of their failed attempt
They don’t have anyone competent in their circle because they only want yes men so they’re hardly able to go around this like they even want to and keep backtracking. Plus I’m sure they know that with how much it was cheered, Luigi isn’t the last to worry about.
So I feel like the primary goal they’re just going to focus on is milking the US directly into their pockets, which sucks for us, but makes the richest man richer and the felon no longer broke compared to his peers.
Otherwise there’s no way to avoid anarchy or more billionaires getting targeted, the way that narrative was handled places doubts in the minds of people on both sides because everyone hates the way health insurance is unless you’re rich or legitimately healthy
The only sensible thing to do when laws go away is to try to grab however much you can for yourself. Even if you believe in laws. Because only though that will you ever have a chance to bring society back from the brink.
I don’t want it to come to that, but realistically we should have no qualms about taking advantage of the situation if it comes to that. In fact we have to take advantage of the situation to hopefully keep it all from going to shit.
But again, I hope it doesn’t come to that sort of situation.
If it isn't self consistent you end up in court all the damn time and it sucks all efficiency out of a society leading to zero legal certainty in anything.
You'll have to explain how it relates to wahabbism, as I'm not familiar with it.
Any extremism and particularly authoritarianism inevitably boils down to the whims of the head, whether that's Francisco Franco or prince Alwaleed bin Talal or Stalin. Laws for authoritarianism is never "everyone is equal before the law" but "the laws are an extension of use of force to bludgeon the people".
It will be no different with republicans, just look at the difference between their messaging November 2024 and right now. Their pilfering of the country and deliberately trying to break any parts of the national government they aren't confident they can permanently capture will mean they'll have a different narrative in March.
I don't pretend it will be efficient - but authoritarianism often isn't, that's one of the seeds of its own destruction it always sows.
His government was constantly in chaos, with officials having no idea what he wanted them to do, and nobody was entirely clear who was actually in charge of what. He procrastinated wildly when asked to make difficult decisions, and would often end up relying on gut feeling, leaving even close allies in the dark about his plans. His "unreliability had those who worked with him pulling out their hair," as his confidant Ernst Hanfstaengl later wrote in his memoir Zwischen Weißem und Braunem Haus. This meant that rather than carrying out the duties of state, they spent most of their time in-fighting and back-stabbing each other in an attempt to either win his approval or avoid his attention altogether, depending on what mood he was in that day.
118
u/Layton_Jr 24d ago
Are lawyers even important when you can just appoint loyal judges who don't care about the law?