Comments by "TheEvertw" (@TheEvertw) on "Jake Broe"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"If you are not American, none of this will make any sense to you"
Maybe, just maybe, that is because it doesn't make sense. Americans may be jaded about political dysfunction, but this is not normal for a democracy. In fact, if a minority can stop the operation of the government, it isn't a democracy.
Americans have been gaslit about their country being "the best democracy in the world", but in objective truth, it isn't. There are many countries that are much more democratic than the USA. But sure, some dumbass will shout "that is socialism" and think that is all that needs to be said. But he confuses "socialism", whatever he may mean with that, with a functioning democracy. The USA is a dysfunctional democracy that is sliding towards a fascist dictatorship.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"This wonderful country once called Ukraine"
That country was also the original Russia, until the Moskovites appropriated that name in the 18th and 19th centuries. We shouldn't call Moskovy "Russia" anymore, Russia was western Ukraine, the region around Lviv, in the 13th, 14th, 15th, 16th and 17th centuries, and there are map calling it as such made in the 18th and 19th centuries. Which, coincidentally, includes that map on which Putin failed to find the name Ukraine although it most definitely was there. That was a 19th century map. If he had looked carefully, he would have seen his country marked as Muskovy.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"Only having one chamber"
Many European countries have a 2-chamber system. (12 out of 27 EU nations), including France, Germany, Italy, UK, etc. However, those two chambers usually do not have the same rights. The upper house is usually used to check the quality of legislation, not so much its political direction. Either the country has a method to overrule the upper house, or it has recurring discussions to remove it if it gets too political. It is accepted that the lower house has the biggest mandate.
But the US situation where the Senate is involved in many executive functions like appointing officials is crazy. Our fail-safe against government misconduct is that Parliament can remove the government or a specific minister with a simple majority. The US situation where the President is both the Head of State and the Head of Government is not common in Europe. The Head of Government is the Prime Minister, not the President.
Which is why in Europe you will NEVER see a minister say to a Parliamentary Committee "I have no time for this", like Bill Barr infamously said. If he'd have done that in Europe, he'd be without a job as soon as Parliament could be convened to debate a motion of No Confidence. And because these committees have real power, their witness interviews are not performative drama pieces. They ask real questions and listen to the answers. If someone doesn't show up or refuses to answer questions, they get sent to prison until they do. Even if he is the head of government. I have seen Prime Ministers sweat like a pig in front of such a committee, singing like a budgie.
A Parliament is a much better reflection of the Will of the Voter than that single President. That is why Parliament should have (much) more power than the President. Trump has proven that the "three co-equal branches" thing doesn't work. Parliament, specifically the lower house, should be primus inter pares.
1
-
1