Source on the passport revocations? That’s super scary.

All the more reason to pirate after you cancel.

Glorious leader is immortal! El Gulagador for you!

It became 2% after the Russian invasion of Crimea, but it was increased to 3.5% (+1.5% infrastructure) this year, due to threats from both Trump and Putin.

They have been pretty vocal about not being able to afford the 5% GDP spending target.

Jesse, what the fuck are you talking about?

Also Trump encouraged Israel to break the January ceasefire in the first place.

Canada and Australia are Fptp, not PR

I know what you mean, but I’d argue that the balance of powers principle in the US giving the president so much power has done the opposite of what it’s supposed to do. Instead of the executive being restrained by the other branches, it has completely taken over them because the other branches are worried that they would lose too much by resisting.

Whereas in a PR parliamentary system, it is extremely rare for any one party to have a majority, so they need to compromise with other parties to elect a prime minister. Even during war time, it’s common practice to use a unity cabinet that includes all major parties. The judiciary seems to be more independent and can enforce the basic law. Also, 50% of MPs or the president/king can call an election at any time if the PM is getting too spicy.

Tyranny of the majority is tricky though. Most of the responses to that seem to be devolution or international cooperation.

Authoritarians misunderstanding history? Who could have thought?

There is probably some nuance between KPD Antifaschistische Aktion, SPD Iron Front, and WW2 Resistance antifa, but none of that is relevant to modern discussions about American Antifa.

The most important thing to note about KPD, SPD, and the resistance during 1930s-1940s is about violent resistance to fascists rising to power. My hypothesis is that political violence is unproductive before rule of law breaks down, but then becomes the only option after rule of law breaks down.

Let the states take back authority on policy until the federal branch can sort out its structural issues.

Different parts of the French state have different incentives

Definitely.

I like searching the library of Congress’s site for the federalist papers when researching about the (surprisingly advanced) political science discussions during the Enlightenment.

Federalist papers 67-70, and 73 make some comparisons between kings and presidents. It’s definitely clear that a king is a common example in the political discourse at the time, which makes sense since their system had a king just 10-15 years before.

Yeah, there seems to be a weird reversal in the powers of a king and president. Federalist#73 says that kings fear challenging parliament, so a president who has to face reelection should be even less powerful, but it really seems like the opposite these days. The US president has so much influence over congress. It also seems like they have more of a mandate to override congress because of how involved they are in campaigning. The modern system of prime Ministers where the executive comes from parliament seems to play out better in modern politics.

Off-topic, but Federalist#66 is suuuper unfortunate to read in the modern day. The idea that senators will feel empowered to impeach officials they previously endorsed, just because individuals in the senate might feel like an official has betrayed their trust? The idea that a majority of congress would never act tyranically? Hamilton, what the fuck? I guess the main issue though is that parties have become much stronger than democratic pressure on individual seats in the senate.

In many countries, the president is the head of state, they manage the transition of power and act as diplomats, in place of a king. Finland has both a president and PM.

“Illegals” is official federal terminology now?

Literally worse than the goons in Hong Kong. At least they had badge numbers.

Reddit is complicit

Unfortunately, politics is terminally online now.

The only ridiculous person here is you.

Go Charlie Kirk somewhere else.

Right, but greed is just the term for self-interest that is harmful to others. My point was that the “non-harmful” greed that knitwitt was talking about is the same constructive self interest that drives society in both capitalist and socialist systems.