It seems much that way to the reactionaries and I see their argument. Read plenty of Moldbug too. I just think at end of the day, in US system the Rule of Law > Leader and that is a system I’d prefer (and I think 70%+ of the world prefers) vs the Chinese alternative
-
-
Replying to @atlasontilt @jarurik and
Disagree strongly the idea that "rule of law" is even possible ("laws" don't rule - men do) but even the fiction of "rule of law" is dead after a century of
#manipulatingProceduralOutcomes Arguing its virtues is like talking about the benefits of true Communism1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @jarurik and
We just saw it work with Trump. Biggest would-be autocrat potus in 100+ yrs and the institutions held ground. Eg Imagine Trump/Comey ‘Go easy on Flynn’ dinner in China. Would CCP-Comey say ‘no’ to Xi the way Comey did to Trump? Rule of Law allows Comey to feel safe defying Trump.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @atlasontilt @jarurik and
You're joking right? You're holding up Flynn's treatment as an example of "rule of law"?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @jarurik and
No I’m pointing out that CCP version of Comey would be terrified to defy Xi. As would every single CCP bureaucrat. Is that incorrect? Is it also incorrect that an FBI director in america has the ability to defy POTUS without fear of direct personal harm?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @atlasontilt @jarurik and
Yes, the FBI director and any Cathedral functionary is free to disobey his legal boss as long as his legal boss isn't Cathedral approved. Thinking this is somehow proof of "rule of law" is insane.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @CovfefeAnon @jarurik and
1)Only when that boss is clearly acting unethically as defined by law. 2)we’re talking about structure of sovereign rule, not policy disagreement. U dislike cathedral bc u dislike it’s policy. But it’s folly to prefer an autocrat-don’t u realize you just built a cathedral of one?
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @atlasontilt @CovfefeAnon and
But isn't that better? There's no artifice. Everything is on one man's head. And he's not behind a curtain. If he fails, the people can suffer him, like a rocky marriage, or they can kill him. And most importantly, he will know those are his only options.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jarurik @CovfefeAnon and
‘Perform or die’ is not what I want my leader signing up for. Only a sociopath cares about power enough to want that job & will create a corrupt bureaucracy around them to maintain it. This is history 101. You’re trading your own rights for the (false) allure of accountability.
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @atlasontilt @CovfefeAnon and
Jack Rurik Retweeted Jack Rurik
If you take history 102, you'll realize things haven't always been like that and they won't always be either. Power doesn't actually corrupt.https://twitter.com/jarurik/status/1375890428139028483 …
Jack Rurik added,
Jack Rurik @jarurikOne of the core beliefs of Western Civilization is this unequivocal acceptance of the idea that "power corrupts". Not that disturbed people seek power, run from responsibility and deflect blame. But one day this will all be resolved. https://twitter.com/TrinTurambar4/status/1375837769235365891 …1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
"Power corrupts" looks true when you have a system that's rife with awful incentives.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.