You’d think a hegemony with a 100-years tradition of upkeeping democracy against major non-democratic players, would have some mechanism that would prevent itself from throwing down it’s key ideology.

Is it really that the president is all that decides about the future of democracy itself? Is 53 out of 100 senate seats really enough to make country fall into authoritarian regime? Is the army really not constitutionally obliged to step in and save the day?

I’d never think that, of all places, American democracy would be the most volatile.

      • angrystego@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 month ago

        I’m flattered, but I’m not in the mood right now. I’ll be in my corner worrying about constitution redoings…

    • Soggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Sure, you’d end up with at least two countries because many states would just refuse to join the new republic.

    • Honytawk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Do you really want to do that now knowing who would put an autograph there?

    • tamal3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Let’s go crowd sourced, a la Iceland. That truly opened my eyes to the political possibilities in the Internet age… If only big corps didn’t make all the decisions.