
History tells us what will happen next with Brexit and Trump - iamben
https://medium.com/@theonlytoby/history-tells-us-what-will-happen-next-with-brexit-trump-a3fefd154714#.kni05egzj
======
rdlecler1
The 'Make America Great Again' vote is coming from people who are less well
off (at least relatively) than in prior generations. You can't just dismiss
that. These people have real grievances, even if the proposed solution is not
the right one. Showing that the mean average has improved (with most value
captured by the wealthy and well educated) does not matter to the lowest
denominator.

The problem is that the elites always tend to go too far. Eventually the
downtrodden will use whatever weapon they have at their disposal to punish the
counterparty; even if it comes with a great cost to themselves. What's their
alternative? Rolling over again and watching elites benefit? That's is never
going to improve your situation. If we don't want Trump then we can't ignore
his voters just because they don't share our values and beliefs. There is no
free lunch here. If we ignore these people then we are doomed to repeat the
mistakes of the past. The compromise may not be the ideal outcome, but this is
a prisoners dilemma scenario and the pursuit of the ideal scenario usually
leads to the worst scenario for all parties.

------
ebfe
>There were a few brilliant minds who started to warn that something big was
wrong..., but they were dismissed as hysterical, mad, or fools, as is always
the way, and as people who worry about Putin, Brexit, and Trump are dismissed
now.

In what world does this author live?

~~~
DefaultUserHN
The author lives in a fantasy where the Supreme Court Judges appointed by
Obama will somehow side with Trump's total disregard of the Constitution. And
where Trump can just ask the military to go and kill all member of Congress
and the military will just do it, with no regard for the Constitution, which
they pledge to uphold. Where civilian do not have guns to protect themselves.
And there is no NRA or well-regulated militias to protect civilians against a
tyranny. Where, somehow, Trump is able to assume command over every cops to
turn against each cop's own cities and states. A world where the 50 states,
backed by their own militias like the National Guards, will just let a federal
government become a tyranny without fighting back.

The delusion of this author is high.

People like this author does not understand the checks and balance built into
our government to prevent such a situation from happening.

The many arms forces that check each other: The federal government's arm
forces (the military), the states' arm forces (National Guards), the cities'
arm forces (cops), the people's arm forces (well regulated militia like the
the Minute Men), and the armed people themselves.

All these different arms forces will never join together under a tyranny
President. They are a check a tyrant President, and they are a check on each
other.

Not only that, the majority of the military will never go against the American
citizens and the Constitution, no matter what a tyrant President says. In
fact, the military will instead arrest the tyrant President, and put him to
trail with Congress to impeach him.

Peoples like this author are delusional.

~~~
dragonwriter
> The author lives in a fantasy where the Supreme Court Judges appointed by
> Obama will somehow side with Trump's total disregard of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court has 9 seats, one is currently vacant and the majority
leadership in the Senate has indicated that they intend to keep it that way
until, at least, the next President is in office.

The remaining 8 Justices were appointed by:

Ronald Reagan (1), George H. W. Bush (1), Bill Clinton (2), George W. Bush
(2), and Barack Obama (2).

Assuming Trump is able to fill the vacant seat, any of his actions that were
challenged could be upheld by an outright majority of the Court without _any_
Justice appointed by a Democrat (much less any specifically appointed by
Barack Obama) siding with it.

Even _without_ Trump appointing a justice, his challenged policies could
survive Supreme Court review without any Democrat-appointed Justices siding
with them, so long as they were upheld by the Circuit Court through which they
passed on the way to the Supreme Court, since a 4-4 Supreme Court split leaves
the lower court decision as the end of the issue.

(Some of the rest of your objections might have some merit, but this one has
none.)

~~~
DefaultUserHN
>Circuit Court

And that's assuming that the Circuit Court will somehow support Trump's
tyranny. Which is never gonna happen (even Republicans judges don't like
Trump).

So again, the author is delusional.

------
Gustomaximus
> In a nutshell, at university I would fail a paper if I didn’t compare at
> least two, if not three opposing views on a topic. Taking one telling of
> events as gospel doesn’t wash in the comparative analytical method of
> research that forms the core of British academia.

I thought this was a great line. I wish people could bring this into general
thinking and journalism. Showing some understanding, and then likely empathy,
to other views is likely one of the best things we can introduce to being a
more peaceful and generally better world.

------
mindslight
Of course the author misses the causality of Brexit/Trump/generalspite, which
is the political upper class gradually implementing authoritarian control and
economically squeezing us ever harder.

If we wanted to stop the current trend, we would have had to do so several
decades ago.

