this post was submitted on 05 Mar 2025
1121 points (99.6% liked)

Political Memes

6402 readers
4096 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I mean the checks and balances are definitely there. They've just been taken over too. You just can't have democracy without the people having faith in democracy.

[–] Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah... Kinda miffs people blaming the balances and checks. Like, they are there. They're just being ignored. Lmfao. Cause some dipshits gave the fascists all 3 branches

[–] IzzyJ@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (2 children)

I feel like if controlling all three branches is enough to undo the whole constitution, it wasnt that good. If they wanted to prevent a tyrant, they shouldve thought to ask "what if that tyrant is popular"

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 1 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

I mean... A popular tyrant will win no matter the political system, because who's gonna do anything about them?

[–] IzzyJ@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

Turkey had a pretty good system for that until the solution was circumvented by religos

[–] Fredthefishlord@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

If they wanted to prevent a tyrant, they shouldve thought to ask "what if that tyrant is popular"

They did dude. What do you think the 2nd amendment is for.

Also, you say that like controlling all 3 branches is a small thing. It means you control the whole government....

[–] IzzyJ@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

The weakness with the Second Amendment is that it effectively relies on a minority winning if it gets to that point. I hope I don't have to point out that wars that come down to numbers rarely end well