There’s literally never been a more opportune moment for an American president to democratize the country by fiat now that laws no longer constrain him. But I have zero confidence that he’ll make any use of that power.
I’ve given a lot of thought to vital reforms but exactly zero to “what if the president wasn’t bound by law?”
For anyone clutching their pearls at the thought, recall e.g. that we only have the 14th & 15th amendments b/c southern states were coerced to ratify, or have no representation in congress.
And that our current constitution was established by wholly ignoring the constitution in force at the time.
So there’s lots of precedent for democratizing on principle while violating the law.
Lawbreaking is often essential for democratization when the laws are undemocratic, violating equal representation for each American, or equal rights for all.
Too much discourse in the last decade emphasized law & order as the foundation of democracy, which is fucking nuts. Only in an ideal world.
I agree with almost everything you said here.
But here is the problem with this: President X, by fiat, democratizes ABC. President Z comes in, and by fiat, does anti-ABC.
And we become a stinkier shithole than we already are, for a lack of a better word.
