7 days in May. A movie for out times
Another one.
Two democrat lawmakers shot one dead as MAGA shout lets make assassinations great again while tim waltz says " come on guys - we dont settle our differences through violence" as the US helps bomb Iran.
Why pray tell do you share that with me?
Like I’ve said before, 2025 USA officially entered dystopian territory with most of our citizens and leaders lost, with their heads so far up their keisters it’s not even funny.
Free fall territory.
From here on in, the Black Swans will be dictating our future.
Caught now but MAGA terrorism is in America . The inevitable outcome of representative democracy - two big business party State.
How can you call this a realistic “representative democracy” when we’ve evolved it to a system where money is more important than votes.
Knowledge,
Education,
Honesty,
Respect, …
All that is held in ridicule by the billionaire that want to play at being Gods and the sheople that want to be lied to.
Thats what I am talking about comrade. Its the who that has been , is being and will be represented that has delivered where we are.
How and why did we end up with this aberration of Democracy?
There have always been people with the leader personality. They live for control. Those leading members of society (in 1781) who were tied to Britain, left for another British colony. Those leaders who remained tried to find a way to continue leading. Their personality demanded it. They invented an ideology of, by and for power and that ideology invented the political party.
When Lincoln participated in the rise of the Republican Party, it was a party of the people first (opposing power) and consequently, Lincoln could say “government of the People, by the People and for the People”. Then he was killed and the Party became just another tool of an ideology and the powerful.
Leaders exercise power without, necessarily, having the levers of power a position in the government gives them. Instead, they create a framework of law that keeps the people under control; always fearful of becoming known to enforcement or paid well for implementing the controls and laws invented by leaders.
Leaders made the choice of punishment over prevention; yielding ever-expanding crime instead of social stability, insecurity rather than trust and collaboration. Why? Because a stable society characterized by trust and collaboration has no need for leaders and gives no demagogues power.
We live in a fulfilling prophesy that law creates outlaws, punishment creates fear and fear drives cooperation with evil.
How we escape can only be by understanding the source of leader control and eliminating it, beginning with political parties.
Political parties will always find ways to distract us with headline-worthy disclosures and new investigations. All of it is only a show, “full of sound and fury, signifying nothing”.
Only imagination can reveal the second step toward regaining a functional Democracy: All the repairs to the Constitution needed to take power from the powerful.
Basically simple. In 1984 we voted in and added a technocratic form of government to run the governmental departments. It was known as the Chevron deference. In 2024 the Supreme Court realized they made a terrible ruling and reversed their ruling to take away the Chevron deference. What we are going through now is cleaning up 40 years of technocratic processes in Government operations.
In France,
-
the government has a very extended power to take executive decisions, under the control of the judges.
-
the government and the state agencies have the power to explain how they will apply the laws and the executive decisions, under the control of the judges.
It is not bureaucracy, it is a guaranty for the citizens and for the firms.
But the judge is not constrained by the interpretation when it judges a case. The interpretation is an element and if it is reasonable and lawful, it will be upheld.
On the reverse, a citizen or a firm can oppose its interpretation to the administration, and that’s a guaranty.
All is a question of balance.
Now, i feel that the state of our democracies is not the consequences of this matter. There are more serious causes.
For instance, the priority given to the big business and its interests.
Eisenhower, who was not a leftist, denounced it in his time.
A second factor is the lack of moral sense and of limits of politicians. Trump is the perfect exemple, fanning the embers to come to power.
1 Like
That was one of the major problems we were having. What the hell does a judge know about running a department like a business? We need the departments operating in a method that makes the people happy and does not bankrupt the nation. Trump is doing a great job.
How ironic, here’s a bit of synchronicity. I can image Jeremy might well be your kind of guy, so the message might be lost on ya.
Jeremy Bentham’s Rational Inhumanity
Ryan Ward explores the minds and morals of the 19th-century ruling class
“A midst the renegotiation of the social contract between the ruling class and the poor who were forced into wage labor in the cities during the Industrial Revolution, a flurry of anti-poor laws was passed. These laws were passed in an effort to control the poor, keep them subservient and easily managed, and punish harshly crimes against property.¹ The Workhouse Act of 1723 was one such law. …”
“… Bentham’s detailed plans for his workhouses give a fascinating and sobering insight into the prevailing views of the wealthy and propertied in England at the time. While some of these views can be rationalized and dismissed as the product of a less enlightened and humane age, the core belief that the wealthy are fundamentally different and better than the poor is something that persists today. Dressed up in more palatable language, this pernicious belief continues to contribute to widescale dehumanization and immiseration.”
Yes, you are correct, it is lost on me. Why in the world would I worry about what’s going on with a 19-century opinion of the ruling class? If you think after 4000 years we cannot understand morals. Then we just better give up. Understanding morals is not a problem for a businessman. Trump is trying to rebalance our system. The Egyptian pharaohs needed to rebalance the system of the greatest civilization mankind has known, about once every 20 years, or once a generation. Morals are a result of the use of certain wisdom defining a portion of knowledge. AI should lend a helping hand for people to understand morals better.
The judge does not operate the department, the judge checks that the department operates in the limits of the law. If civil service can operate out from the bounds of law, it is called a dictatorship.
For instance, if ICE can arrest US citizens, born in USA, decide they are not US citizens, and deport them without giving them access to a judge, nobody is safe.
And the political power can prosecute its opponents, without interference.
Democracy is a system of checks and balances. Trump is breaking the system to institute a dictatorship.
You may think he is making a great job ….
Is this good administration that this woman decides who is chosen for a job.
Dan Driscoll doesn’t say why Jen Easterly’s contract was terminated, but the Pentagon spokesperson wrote on X that the military “is not going to turn [military] cadets into censorship activists.” This is a veiled reference to allegations, made by Laura Loomer and certain conservative circles, that CISA, then headed by Jen Easterly, targeted right-wing voters under the guise of combating disinformation. The senior civil servant also refuted unfounded accusations of widespread electoral fraud during the 2020 election, an electoral defeat that Donald Trump and a portion of his electorate never truly accepted, denouncing alleged fraud.
In the spring, Laura Loomer had, according to the American press, succeeded in obtaining from Donald Trump the head of the powerful electronic intelligence agency NSA, accused of “disloyalty,” and the president’s doctor, accused of being “pro-vaccine.” This thirty-year-old has in the past claimed that Islam was “a cancer,” that 9/11 was the result of an “internal conspiracy,” and that Joe Biden was behind the July 2024 assassination attempt on Donald Trump.
Sure, it’s right there on the bottom line. The big number that puts money in his pocket, that’s the moral choice
Look at today’s world and where it’s taking us.
Because it’s the same mentality that exists in today’s ruling class, you silly self-absorbed Me, me, me, character. Too Much Is Never Enough. Gluttony is Great, great, great - and to heck with everyone else.
2 Likes
The judges have been blocking Trump’s executive orders. It was slowing the rebalancing that is required after the shutting down of the technocratic system being used by our departments. The judges were exercising power over the president to the point that the Supreme Court had to limit the power of the federal judges on issuing nationwide injunctions. Remember we had the Republic democratic system and the Technocratic system writing laws. You are correct that the judges are supposed to operate within the limits of the law. But which laws are the question. The few laws written by congress or the truck loads of laws written by the Technocratic departments.
Congress writes the laws. Two years ago, congress wrote laws that combined equaled a stack of paperwork one inch high. Meanwhile, the technocratic departments wrote laws and regulations that added up to be 27 feet or 324 inches of laws.
The Technocratic Departments lost their power to write laws in July 2024.
Example, the EPA department in 2009 said that CO2 was a pollution and therefore was a “danger to human health”. It “is not a matter of policy – this is simply a matter of science.” The EPA decided to write and enforce laws to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. This was done under the Clean Air Act.
This should not have been done by the Departments. This is a matter for congress. Who gets to say what science is correct? An example going on this week with another department. Trump is trying to get the Federal Reserve to lower the interest rates. The Fed employs over 400 Ph.D. economists. Of the 400, only Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman voted against the decision to keep interest rates unchanged. Why were the 398 PH.D’s were wrong. Was it political? Point being, the EPA today is going to court to try and repeal the Endangerment Finding. They are saying that there is nothing wrong with carbon emissions. That they’re not going to cause scientifically and medically proven damage. The EPA is claiming that trillions of dollars’ worth of regulations has been enforced. They are also saying that CO2 greenhouse gases contributed to global climate change. And the amount is just above zero. The EPA now wants congress to make and define the laws.
The question is why the judges allow trillions of dollars of costly regulations to hurt America. Was it political.
I don’t know if these regulations hurt USA or not. To strike them down for these reasons would be a political judgement.
What I know if that if these regulations have been passed according a legal process, and are conform to the strictures of the upper texts, in short are legal, the judges have not the power to strike them down.
The Supreme Court has cancelled the power of the federal judges to block nationally a presidential executive order. It is its right. But then, it should accept to judge if the order is legal or not, at least by a motivated decision. Not doing it is a political stance, especially as it knows that some of these orders are not legal.
If by hurt America he means it prevents millionaires from getting richer, then yes. But regulations protect the land, air, water, and workers from losing their limbs.
Not only hurts America. These regulations hurt people all around the earth.
I know for a fact that these regulations have put several of my neighbors out of business. The cost of updating their equipment to meet the regulations was beyond economic level of being able to stay in business. Nobody has been able to take over their farms and operate the land after they shut down. The costs are just unjustifiable because of regulations. Now we find out that those regulations were built upon unproven science that was decided by departments relying on professors and experts that we’re doing science without any standard datum points to work from. And now sixteen years later the departments are wanting to get rid of those regulations because there is no science to back up their political creation.
During trump’s first term he found it almost impossible to get anything done due to the fact of law fair. Law fair only works when you have political driven judges. Chuck Schumer is trying to use law fair again against the Republicans. They don’t win the cases. But they win by 1000 cuts that cause trump not to get anything done. Trump is on to the Democrats and judges that don’t give a damn about America. They just wanna be in power.
You are correct. The departments do what they want, and they work the legal system to get what they want. The departments have been getting bigger and more powerful every year. Congress has five years to change the department’s new rules and regulations. That doesn’t work very well when you have one party in charge for 2 terms. What the departments want is funding. And they got all the funding and are bloated as hell.
What we are looking at today is the department’s and the executive branch teamed up and created Russia gate scandal. This will probably take two to three years to sort out.