Not to do one of those "Americans make everything about themselves" type comments, but bear with me for a moment here:
The "mature #democracy" is dying because it's so lazy defending something it never thought it had to defend
While the emerging democracy vibrantly defends its institutions because it's painfully aware of what it can lose and how much it suffered to get the chance to have one
"#Moldova Just Jailed Its #Putin-Aligned Governor. Hereβs What She Did"
https://united24media.com/world/moldova-just-jailed-its-putin-aligned-governor-heres-what-she-did-10484
#USA
@benroyce@mastodon.social
I wish we would jail our Putin aligned politicians. The whole Republican Party, most of the Supreme Court, and half the Democratic Party would be in jail and we could get representation of the people in office.
@benroyce@mastodon.social I've noticed that very few democracies have strong safeguards against a rogue leader ruining or exploiting the system, and even make provisions to allow such a situation. For example, the monarch of the UK is technically able to invite anyone to be the prime minister, despite the expectation that they'll only do so for the leader of the largest party. Relying on ceremony and tradition to keep things working as expected to me seems like a bad idea.
@bemmesr@mastodon.social wrote:
Relying on ceremony and tradition to keep things working as expected to me seems like a bad idea.
But they don't rely only on that.
They also rely on the memory of some events of the 17th century, namely, what happened to Charles I and James II.
@benroyce@mastodon.social
@bemmesr@mastodon.social
this would be a problem if they had a mad king. but i think if they ever did, the king would be the one to lose, at this point in the uk's history
not that the uk's democracy is squeaky clean, but more that there has to a be a certain will to defend something, as the most important aspect
because all democracies have some kind of weakness you allude to, if not the exact example you cite
@benroyce@mastodon.social wrote:
this would be a problem if they had a mad king. but i think if they ever did, the king would be the one to lose, at this point in the uk's history
They famously had at least one and he lost indeed.
(George III.)
@bemmesr@mastodon.social
Ben Royce πΊπ¦
πΈπ©
