The 5 Red Lines American Democracy Couldn’t Survive Being Crossed
Will America, as it exists today, still exist ten years from now? The differences between the Left and Right in America have gotten so deep and irreconcilable that it’s an open question. Many liberals would probably agree with that because they think Trump wants to be a “king” or because they consider conservatives to be so evil that they can’t live with us anymore. On the other hand, many conservatives have now realized in the aftermath of Charlie Kirk being assassinated and millions of liberals publicly celebrating it, that a large percentage of the Left in this country quite literally wants us dead.
Could we still pull back from the brink? Theoretically, yes. In fact, everyone should hope that happens because almost no one would ultimately benefit from widespread violence, a coup, a revolution, a dictatorship, secession, or a civil war. Still, what happens ultimately isn’t up to you or me. Most people, including on the Left, have to want to avoid disastrous levels of disorder and violence. Do they? That’s debatable.
With all of that in mind, it’s worth asking a critical question: What does crossing the Rubicon look like? At what point should we accept that our old system is essentially dead, and the new rulers of our country are going to be whoever seizes and holds power? After all, it’s not like a neon sign is going to light up in the sky saying, “Democracy is over and the time for preparing for revolution has begun.”
Well, here’s the answer to that question. These are the five government policies that American democracy couldn’t survive, and frighteningly, 3-out-of-the-5 have already been seriously discussed by the Democratic Party.
1) Getting rid of the filibuster on legislation in the Senate and stacking the Supreme Court: Why is this so critical? Because without a filibuster in the Senate, a bare majority from one party can write any law they want, while the opposing side will be completely powerless. It’s entirely possible that any party in that position could rewrite the rules to such an extent that they might never be able to be voted out. Yet and still, the courts would limit their power in certain areas. However, when you have full control of the legislative process, that’s no longer a significant problem because you will inevitably move on to step #2.
2) Stacking the Supreme Court: If the filibuster on legislation were removed, it would simply take a majority in the House, the Senate, and the Presidency to stack the Supreme Court. Incidentally, Republicans are in that position right now. So, if Donald Trump really did want to be a “king,” Republicans could nuke the filibuster for legislation in the Senate with 51 votes, then they could stack the Supreme Court with Trump loyalists, and ANYTHING Trump wanted to do would be ruled legal. The very fact that they’re not doing this tells you a lot, as does the fact that many mainstream Democrats have called for doing exactly this. However, this is nothing less than an attempt to put a nice face on a one-party state that will rule the country with an iron fist. If either party did this, it would essentially be an open declaration of war on the rest of America.
3) Widespread gun confiscation: As the meme goes:
If the American public were to ever give up their guns, soon thereafter, they’d be faced by agents of a tyrannical government pointing guns at them and issuing horrific demands. It’s a lot harder to make people get on the boxcar when they can shoot back. If the government ever demands your guns, then don’t kid yourself, it only ends with one side or the other disarmed and dead in great numbers.
4) Rigging the elections: Claims that the “elections are rigged” have now become commonplace, no matter who wins. Trump’s claim that the 2020 election was rigged was the most prominent example of it, but Al Gore and Hillary Clinton did it, too. However, ultimately, if enough Americans become convinced that those claims are true, the whole country will fall apart. After all, if the elections are rigged, the only way to have freedom is to take it with violence. That’s one reason people in both parties should be bending over backwards to have transparent, professional elections with both sides participating to ensure fairness. However, if anything, the Democrats in particular have been moving in the exact opposite direction.
For example, why would you do this if you genuinely want honest elections? Obviously, you wouldn’t:
It is entirely possible that we could see Democrats go further and further with these kinds of measures, and we could get to the point that it’s so obvious they’re rigging elections that it can’t be denied anymore. If we ever get there, democracy is dead and voting becomes irrelevant.
5) Cancelling elections: Obviously, the cherry on top of this whole dictatorial sundae would just be cancelling the election outright because of some kind of “emergency.” However, if America had elections during WW2, the Spanish flu, the Depression, and the Civil War, there’s pretty much no possible excuse for skipping one at this point. Even if there are aliens invading, the election needs to happen, or whoever is in charge needs to be moved out of office with extreme prejudice if we want to continue being a free society.
How about open borders flooding the nation with illegal immigrants and then passing legislation giving them the right to vote while clearly motivating their vote based on access to government benefits?
I would tag that as the most prevalent democracy-destroying movement that is common in all of the West.
Is my "red line" part of the stacking the court or eliminating the filibuster? My red line has always been elimination of the electoral college, but I'm not sure what the mechanism for that would be. With NYC electing an Islamic socialist, and CA electing moronic airheads at all levels of government, it means that I will not be peacefully enslaved by those states. As Frank points out, the overlap with illegal immigration only adds to the calamity of that situation!