- Dec 1, 2011
- 24,196
- 20,001
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Others
The changes to the constitution would be against the constitution? Like the 21st amendment was?
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
The latest DSA primary winner has some interesting thoughts...
- Thread starter ThatRobGuy
- Start date
Hans Blaster
Your turn, Atlanta!
- Mar 11, 2017
- 26,526
- 19,007
- 56
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Upvote
0
- Sep 4, 2005
- 31,365
- 17,800
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
And how is that different than what I referenced?
Per my previous post
- Eliminate capitalism
- Eliminate the two party system
- Abolish the US senate
- Expand Congress
- Replace the President and Supreme Court with an executive and judiciary chosen by and subordinate to Congress.
- Establish statehood for DC
- Redirect funding to public services as steps towards fully abolishing the police and prison system
- Draft a new constitution
- Public sector takeover of large private companies
They literally say all of those things in big bold letters on their website.
And then in my follow up post (which you're replying to)
"We want to abolish the Senate and replace the President and Supreme Court with an executive and judiciary chosen by and subordinate to Congress...oh, and then we want to write a new constitution"
All of that was in response to someone downplaying the radicalness of their change proposals.
Scrapping the current constitution with a new one, and completely replacing the system of government with a completely different one would be a pretty radical change, would it not?
Is this gonna be one of those those "well, defund the police doesn't really mean defund the police" sort of defenses? What's your angle here?
- Sep 4, 2005
- 31,365
- 17,800
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
They didn't say making changes to it on their website, they suggested completely replacing it with a new one.
"We are workers fighting to transform society: to win the battle for democracy, draft a new constitution, and create a democratic socialist republic."
A) They actually mention wanting a democratic socialist republic.
B) Do you not see the hint of irony in your statement there? "They make it quite clear"... no they didn't. Otherwise you wouldn't have followed it up with "perhaps" and "I can't tell because they were vague".
Perhaps they're just confused about the differences between a parliamentary system and a socialist republic? Because they specifically use the words socialist republic.
Last edited:
- Dec 1, 2011
- 24,196
- 20,001
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Others
Well, their goals are even less realistic than I thought.They didn't say making changes to it on their website, they suggested completely replacing it with a new one.
"We are workers fighting to transform society: to win the battle for democracy, draft a new constitution, and create a democratic socialist republic."
Upvote
0
- Sep 4, 2005
- 31,365
- 17,800
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
...I mean, anyone remembers anything of the 80's already knew that.
But given that a lot of the DSA victors are up and comers who were born during the grunge era, perhaps they're not as familiar with the eastern bloc.
But either way, you'd think they'd at least want to wait until they see if that whole "free bus and grocery store" thing actually works before going for the big Hail Mary power play.
While they've pulled off some upset victories, it's still a little premature to shooting for the moon.
Upvote
0
Hans Blaster
Your turn, Atlanta!
- Mar 11, 2017
- 26,526
- 19,007
- 56
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Your summary:
"Shows that they're pushing for some sort of single-party controlled sort of deal. That goes quite a bit beyond "they just want to be like Denmark"-style defenses of them that people want to prop up."
Doesn't match. There is no mention of "single party controlled" "deal" of any kind. Their poster explicitly mentions *multi-party* legislature. I discussed none of the economic parts.
Under "DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS" DSA wrote:
Replace the two-party system with a multi-party democracy. Expand the House of Representatives, implement proportional representation and ranked choice voting in all elections, and abolish the Senate.
Which after looking into it is remarkably close to the actual government of Denmark. The major differences are that Denmark uses proportional representation for parties throughout the whole of the country and the DSA plan you posted also uses ranked choice voting.
Under "A REAL DEMOCRACY" the DSA wrote:
Abolish the Electoral College. Replace the President and Supreme Court with an executive and judiciary chosen by and subordinate to Congress.
which is an executive form very similar to that of Denmark. The Danish parliament also selects judges, as would the DSA plan, though I can't quite tell what they mean by "subordinate".
Other than the confusing "subordinate judiciary" language, only the "eliminate the Senate and replace the president with a council [cabinet]" language would require a Constitutional amendment. What surprised me was how close to the fabled "Denmark" the selected final state was.
For reference this article describes how the Danish government works:
Politics of Denmark - Wikipedia
(I will fight them to the death if they try to bring about a "king" though.)
Upvote
0
Hans Blaster
Your turn, Atlanta!
- Mar 11, 2017
- 26,526
- 19,007
- 56
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Where? I skipped the preamble and "history lesson" and went to the 'what we fight for" section. I skipped the items not having to do with government structure (ICE/palestine, etc)
Perhaps I should have started a new sentence. A unicameral, multi-party parlimentary system is what they called for. The "executive council" is a bit vague. There are several forms such could take. A true council of equals like in Switzerland, or a "first among equals" type prime minister (like Denmark, LOL). Certainly nothing like the uniparty state you claimed.
Maybe you could explain how they can't be both at the same time. A republic is government w/o hereditary leadership and certainly many parliamentary systems do suffer the stench of monarchism (including Denmark), but others don't (like Italy and Germany). Socialist is an economic system, not a governmental system.
Upvote
0
- Sep 4, 2005
- 31,365
- 17,800
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
That is single party controlled.
1) the "requires constitutional amemdment thing" has already been addressed, they mentioned scrapping the current one and writing a new one.
2) if the majority forms of this new single body legislature, and there's literally no other branch that has a check on them (but rather, is subordinate to them), that is literally single-party control.
In the kind of system they're advocating for, they have someone with much more practical power than the king of Denmark has. They call it "Party Chairman"
There's nothing vague or confusing about what subordinate means. They dedicated quite a bit of their website to praising authoritarian socialist and communist leaders, who were party chairmen, and operated in a system in which the judiciary was basically a puppet for the party.
They're pretty open about the fact that they're Marxists on the website. They organized Marx book club nights and celebrate his birthday (a long with other parts of the site that praise people like Mao and Hugo Chavez).
If you're trying to "soften their brand" on their behalf...don't bother, they don't want to soften it.
- Dec 3, 2006
- 10,098
- 6,809
- 61
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
The DSA sweet spot: highly educated, downwardly mobile
Education and economic security are usually correlated. But where the relationship breaks down is fertile territory for the new left.
www.natesilver.net
The DSA sweet spot: highly educated, downwardly mobile
Education and economic security are usually correlated. But where the relationship breaks down is fertile territory for the new left.
www.natesilver.net
Based on this grid, what is the most Democratic voting group in America? It’s voters with postgraduate degrees but lower-to-middle household incomes of $30K to $60K per year.
This is very much also the sweet spot for the DSA. In the group’s most recent member survey in 2021, 80 percent of members aged 25 or older had bachelor’s degrees, but 45 percent had household incomes below $60,000 per year.
This is unusual, because education and income are usually substantially positively correlated. In the composite CES data, only 19 percent of Americans with bachelor’s degrees or higher had household incomes of $60K or below. The DSA rate is around twice that.4 These voters aren’t necessarily “blue collar” in the sense of working with their hands. But that doesn’t mean they’re privileged. Common occupations among DSA members include teachers, non-profit workers, social workers, and public sector employees.
Upvote
0
Pommer
Future History Slab Carver
- Sep 13, 2008
- 25,666
- 15,588
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Deist
- Marital Status
- In Relationship
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Are you suggesting that the people for whom the “system” is not working, are open to a “new system“?The DSA sweet spot: highly educated, downwardly mobile
Education and economic security are usually correlated. But where the relationship breaks down is fertile territory for the new left.
The DSA sweet spot: highly educated, downwardly mobile
Education and economic security are usually correlated. But where the relationship breaks down is fertile territory for the new left.
Based on this grid, what is the most Democratic voting group in America? It’s voters with postgraduate degrees but lower-to-middle household incomes of $30K to $60K per year.
This is very much also the sweet spot for the DSA. In the group’s most recent member survey in 2021, 80 percent of members aged 25 or older had bachelor’s degrees, but 45 percent had household incomes below $60,000 per year.
This is unusual, because education and income are usually substantially positively correlated. In the composite CES data, only 19 percent of Americans with bachelor’s degrees or higher had household incomes of $60K or below. The DSA rate is around twice that.4 These voters aren’t necessarily “blue collar” in the sense of working with their hands. But that doesn’t mean they’re privileged. Common occupations among DSA members include teachers, non-profit workers, social workers, and public sector employees.
Isn’t this like 99% of politics!?
Upvote
0
Hans Blaster
Your turn, Atlanta!
- Mar 11, 2017
- 26,526
- 19,007
- 56
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Democrat
Which would require the same restrictions as amending the current one. Gaining a "trifecta" would not be enough to make those changes by themselves.
LOL. That's how a parliamentary (or is it alimentary) system works. You can find them in countries all over the world. Start with the one closest to you.
LOL. This is getting amusing now. Your head is so far up your anti-commie propaganda that you have lost track of reality. In democracies that person is called "Prime Minister". You might want to check the BBC news. Their country recently switched party leaders in their parliment. Now they have a new guy running the government.
It's too bad you've never read any political theory.
No, rob, you want to paint them as extremists and tie the whole lot of them to the politically diverse party I now support. I'm starting with the false narratives being fear-mongered by you Republicans. Later I might let you know which parts (if any) of their platform I agree with.)
Upvote
0
- Sep 4, 2005
- 31,365
- 17,800
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Yes, Socialist republic takeovers have always operated within the existing legal frameworks of the countries they take over
No it's not... the courts being subordinate to this hypothetical "new & improved" legislative body isn't a normal feature.
The Judiciary - Canada's Court System
An overview of Canada's court system by the Department of Justice Canada
Judicial independence
Judicial independence is a cornerstone of the Canadian judicial system. That is why, under the Constitution, the judiciary is separate from and independent of the other two branches of government, the executive and legislature. Judicial independence guarantees that judges will be able to make decisions free of influence and based solely on fact and law.I'm not using any anti-commie propaganda, I'm using what the DSA says on their own website.
The person is called a "prime minister" in parliamentary systems, but as noted a few times now, they mention wanting a socialist republic, and list things that outside the boundaries of normal western parliamentary systems.
They are extreme. I listed out their mission statement and goals.
(also, I'm not a republican, if I had to identity with any party, it would likely be the Libertarian party, but I stopped even doing that due to some of their platform positions being impractical)
And I'm not the one tying them to anything... they are tied to the Democratic party. They caucus with them, their candidates get endorsed by them, and they run in Democratic primaries for that spot on the ticket.
If they were detached from the Democratic party, then they'd be running as a 3rd party like the Green party does.
Hans, their platform is extremist. You can't say its not. And thier people are running as Democrats. The Democratic Party has accepted them as part of their diversity program. An extremist group with extremist views and goals. They aren't running as 3rd party, they are running on the Democratic Party ticket.
Hans Blaster
Your turn, Atlanta!
- Mar 11, 2017
- 26,526
- 19,007
- 56
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Democrat
You have yet to show that a "socialist republic" is incompatble with current (or modified [no senate, no president]) US government. Where is it that "socialist republic" doesn't overlap with "parliamentary democracy"? Your argument is nothing more than fearmongering about a "socialist republic" necessarily being a communist dictatorship.Yes, Socialist republic takeovers have always operated within the existing legal frameworks of the countries they take over
"socialism" refers to the economic system. "republic" to (part of) the governmental structure. We could describe the current USA as a "Capitalist Republic".
The structuring of the judiciary is not part of that classification system of governments into presidential, parliamentary, etc. Parliamentary government refers to how the executive and legislative are organized and interact. Canadia is a parliamentary democracy (not a republic, they have a "king") . That's what I was referring to. Are you that clueless or are you obtuse?No it's not... the courts being subordinate to this hypothetical "new & improved" legislative body isn't a normal feature.
The Judiciary - Canada's Court System
An overview of Canada's court system by the Department of Justice Canadajustice.canada.ca
Judicial independence
Judicial independence is a cornerstone of the Canadian judicial system. That is why, under the Constitution, the judiciary is separate from and independent of the other two branches of government, the executive and legislature. Judicial independence guarantees that judges will be able to make decisions free of influence and based solely on fact and law.
As to the DSA pamphlet on the judiciary, I can't tell what they really propose. It is very vague and seems to be written by someone who couldn't define "judiciary independence" or why it is valuable. If the Senate and President were removed, a new system of selecting federal judges would be necessary, but I haven't thought about how that might be.
No, you just seem to be brain pickled by it. (did you know there are red stripes in the American flag?)
Again, please state why (or answer above).
I'm not a registered Democrat either (and only started identifying as such this year), but I've been aligned with them for years. You spend all of your time on partisan threads arguing against the democrats side by side with the GOPers. You are a defacto Republican until you start opposing some of their policies and back a few Democratic ones.
Upvote
0
- Sep 4, 2005
- 31,365
- 17,800
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
In Socialist Republics (the kind that DSA is proposing), does the government take over large companies and industries and nationalize them?
If the answer is yes, then it's incompatible.
Private property was one of the key principles in the founding documents.
In terms of the differences between a republic and parliamentary system...
In a US-style republic, the head of state is elected, and serves for a defined term
In a parliamentary system, the head of government is a member of parliament, chosen by parliament, and can be removed by a no-confidence vote. Executive and legislative power are, in essence, fused.
And here is where words matter, and choice of words is key. The DSA specifically says "Socialist Republic", we can't just look at the semantic definitions, but the common usage.
If you look at all of the countries from 1900 through present that have called themselves that:
Socialist Republic of Vietnam (1976–present), Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (1972–present), Czechoslovak Socialist Republic (1960–1990), Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (1922–1991), Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (1963–1992), Romanian Socialist Republic (1965–1989), Socialist Republic of the Union of Burma (1974–1988), Bessarabian Soviet Socialist Republic (1919-1924), Slovak Soviet Republic (1919)
Apart from the sole exception Sri Lanka, every other country from 1900 through present day who has referred to themselves as a "socialist republic" has been a single-party controlled state (perhaps with a token powerless party to feign actual democracy) and had puppet judiciaries who answered to the party.
Given their affinity for Marx and Chavez (that, again, they don't even try to hide...to their credit, they're open and honest about it), and the slogans and symbolism they use, they are most certainly not proposing anything that would involve any healthy competition from other parties. It's very a much a "once we get a majority and take control, change the rules to make sure we never lose that control"
As much as it may come a disappointment to some people....
This isn't the "fist of bipartisanship, middle ground, and healthy give & take" lol.
This is very much one of those "you can vote your way in, but have to shoot your way out" types of situations.
That aside, in big bold letters at the top of the page, they mention "a future with capitalism"... which makes it entirely incompatible with the life, liberty, and property principles of US governance. I probably should have just posted a screenshot of that and said "mic drop"
If they wanted a Nordic style parliamentary system, they would have just said that and made it abundantly clear...from a PR perspective, it would have made their path much easier.
I do support the Democratic positions (on things worth supporting)
I'm okay with gay marriage, I supported pot legalization, my views on abortion law would align with what's in place in the Nordic countries, I've noted that I believe in climate change, I oppose the "school choice/voucher" schemes, I'm pro-vaccine, I've mentioned that there are merits to the single payer healthcare system.
It's just that most of the threads on here tend center around the most hyper-polarized topics that are way to the left. (or people throwing hissy fits about some trivial thing someone in the Trump admin did, and getting bent out of shape because I don't share their outrage)
Hans Blaster
Your turn, Atlanta!
- Mar 11, 2017
- 26,526
- 19,007
- 56
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Atheist
- Marital Status
- Private
- Politics
- US-Democrat
It is? Can you show me in the constitution where private property is explicitly protected (except of course, slaves)?
I know what the difference is. I'm glad to see that you do too. Hopefully we won't have to discuss this again.
What is this? Words are magic? (Yeah, it is. Sigh.)
You are referring to countries that *CHANGE THEIR NAMES* not how political scientists classify them. Even the stupid Google AI summary can manage to figure it out. Instead you lock into one usage.
Upvote
0
Laodicean60
Well-Known Member
- Jul 2, 2023
- 5,723
- 2,407
- 66
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
"We are workers fighting to transform society: to win the battle for democracy, draft a new constitution, and create a democratic socialist republic."
Over my dead body. Civil war? I am the type that likes visual evidence, and it'll be interesting how NY fares under his rule and the stores we'll have to see. I don't think it'll work, and I hope those give me, give me, kids are smart enough to recognize it and don't play the blame game of blaming the rich, and to hear Mamdani's excuse if it fails.
Over my dead body. Civil war? I am the type that likes visual evidence, and it'll be interesting how NY fares under his rule and the stores we'll have to see. I don't think it'll work, and I hope those give me, give me, kids are smart enough to recognize it and don't play the blame game of blaming the rich, and to hear Mamdani's excuse if it fails.
GoldenBoy89
Abolish ICE
- Sep 25, 2012
- 28,346
- 31,451
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Humanist
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Democrat
How would you even abolish the Senate anyway? A constitutional amendment would have to go through the very Senate that would be voting to abolish itself. I don't see that happening ever.
Similar threads
