• xyzzy@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    I’m not the person you were originally replying to, but I think laws should be put in place to prevent extremist parties from being put on the ballot at all. Germany has the right idea.

    But failing that, if a democratically-elected government comes to power and then proceeds to dismantle democracy, then it is in the most literal sense a tyrannical government, and tyrants must be overthrown by any means necessary.

    • Plebcouncilman@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I agree. It is a good mechanism to have though I worry that it can be abused.

      This is why I always end up going to a more libertarian view of things. When there are rules, especially rules that are quite literally designed to be weapons, then there is a big risk for abuse. That’s why state sovereignty for me is such an important component of avoiding the bullshit Trump is (unsuccessfully I might add) trying to pull off. If the states are strong, then no tyrant can really fuck with them. Of course this also runs the risk of tyranny forming within a state, but in that case I think there are mechanisms to combat it, like the other states could embargo it etc.

      My hope is that dems can recognize this and become the party of state sovereignty, though I think that ship has sailed for both parties.