Asklemmy

43989 readers

686 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

162

[Serious] The revolution was successful! The old government is gone. You get to help write the new Constitution. What do you put into it? (sopuli.xyz)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

338 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] mintyfrog@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oversight by whom?

[–] pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Your new government, presumably.

Though if you can't trust it to faithfully enforce its laws, why have it? Or any government, for that matter?

Like, you can take the fear of discrimination to justify not having anything

[–] mintyfrog@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You cannot trust a government to routinely create arbitrary standards used to regulate that same government.

This is different from a government enforcing your average law because this law applies to the election process itself and allows for significant bias. Where there is room for bias in this process, it will be taken advantage of. Look at gerrymandering.

What problem does your law actually solve? If people are willing to elect a candidate, isn't that a sufficient measure of competency? At best you're creating an elitist state controlled by those who set the bar for competency, and at worst you're creating a one party state.

[–] pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz 2 points 1 year ago

Then you can't have any government, or really, any meaningful social interaction.

All democratic governments are built on the assumption they'll be acted upon in good faith, because without good faith, no cooperation or society is possible. All a society is is a group of people either working together in good faith.

If you want to go off and live by the law of the jungle, then by all means, go ahead. But the rest of us will move on without you.