politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- 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:
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
I think we need to drop the premise that the Founders were geniuses who's dusty ass opinions count for jack shit.
The secret is that they were just regular politicians from a long time ago.
No, but they were educated, and may have expected that to persist. #NoChildLeftBehind was a great concept executed terribly; and it made things worse. So the founding fathers had that leg up.
Some concepts were sound, and only missed the loophole where corruption took hold in all three branches at the same time. That's a pretty honest assumption that it wouldn't.
The assumption underpinning the whole concept was this idea that politics could be "nonpartisan." Several founders, including Washington, cautioned that the system would fail if political parties emerged, which happened instantly (in fact, you can see the beginnings even within the constitution itself with vulgar compromises like the three-fifths compromise), because as it turns out, politics isn't just a matter of high-minded ideas but of different classes persuing their conflicting material interests. The reason they couldn't imagine a political party taking over all three branches at once is because they had no understanding of how politics actually works.
Even then, the way the division of powers shook out was left very ambiguous in the constitution. The concept of judicial review that gives the SCOTUS significant power by allowing it to strike down laws was not spelled out in the constitution but established later in Marbury v Madison. The president's role was similarly ambiguous, the only reason it really exists is they knew they'd have to put Washington at the helm somewhere for anyone to buy into it and he immediately clashed with Jefferson and the Democratic-Republicans who thought his role should be extremely limited.
Maybe they should have foreseen a situation where evil and immoral people were allowed and even encouraged to succeed in any sphere of power, whether politics, religion or business. Its actually society which is sick and not just politics.