the_dunk_tank
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
view the rest of the comments
If a single Act transforms your nation from a democratic-republic into a totalitarian dictatorship, then it wasn't a democratic-republic beforehand, now was it?
It's insane how fragile most Westoid democracies are. For example, the elected Prime Minister of Australia Gough Witlam was dismissed by the Governor General (the British Monarch's "ceremonial" representative) using powers that almost everyone reacted to with "woah woah woah, he can do that?!"
If you live in the UK or the commonwealth Anglo settler colonies, there's a pretty good chance that your entire constitutional framework is just a bunch of "conventions" that people mostly agree to follow but aren't enforceable. Nobody really knows what happens if someone stops following them besides "lol constitutional crisis" or "idk civil war".
While it is a bit of a silly concept, the conventions have mostly worked for two hundred years, which is hardly fragile.
I've met one or two experts on British constitutional law, and their opinion was essentially that unless the action is overwhelmingly popular, the Monarch deciding to stop following convention would be the end of the monarchy.
i will say it at least prevents the angloids from handwringing about The Constitution™ all the damn time like yankees do. Though personally I'd prefer to live someone where they bothered to write down their foundational rules at some point, its not like having a written constitution is some universal good