Hacker News Reader

Comment by loeg | Hacker News Reader

No one voted to "overthrow" democracy and do "fascism," cut the hyperbole.

Stop freaking out at thought experiments.

I'm asking what should happen in such a scenario. Should a democratic society be able to vote to nuke their least favorite city? Should they be able to vote for slavery? Should they be able to vote to legalize raping kids?

What should a democratic populace not be able to inflict upon the less powerful segments of society?

To clarify, you agree that the Trump admin / MAGA political movement isn't fascism and his election wasn't an overthrow of democracy? Your earlier remarks were just a thought experiment? That isn't really the sense I've gotten from your historical comments.

I don't agree; it's simply irrelevant here.

We either accept "there are some things you shouldn't be able to democratically vote for" like, say, the Holocaust or reinstating slavery, or we do not.

You added Trump to the conversation, not me.

Isn't that basically what a constitution is for? A constitutional monarchy limits the power of the king, and a constitutional democracy limits the power of the elected government?

The constitution isn't static. Amendments can be repealed. An elected government could appoint judges to overturn any previous precedents

> No one voted to "overthrow" democracy and do "fascism,"

Most Trump voters didn't. A sizeable fraction have openly agitated for, and supported, violently overthrowing our elected government.

It's mostly inaccurate to characterize large groups by their minority fringe members. (I don't like Trump, MAGA, or January 6ers either, FWIW. But it's important to speak about this stuff truthfully.)

> It's mostly inaccurate to characterize large groups by their minority fringe members.

Less so when they elect/appoint them to national-level leadership.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com