this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2025
119 points (98.4% liked)

Progressive Politics

3323 readers
270 users here now

Welcome to Progressive Politics! A place for news updates and political discussion from a left perspective. Conservatives and centrists are welcome just try and keep it civil :)

(Sidebar still a work in progress post recommendations if you have them such as reading lists)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

As you can all see, power can easily corrupt anyone.

all 27 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world 66 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Power can corrupt, but Americans took corrupt and gave it the power. Again.

[–] Xbeam@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago

Yup. Trump wasn't corrupted by power. He was corrupt before the power.

[–] glimse@lemmy.world 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Perhaps there was something corrupt about how the corrupt came to power?

[–] Rhaedas@fedia.io 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Corruption is a flat circle.

[–] jaybone@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 month ago

There’s an obscure reference.

[–] Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago

Power corrupts. Always. Every time. That's the basic idea behind democracy. You only get power for a limited time and you're bound by law and held accountable for breaking it. That's why besides free and fair elections the other pillars of democracy are rule of law and the separation of powers. Right now we can see in the US what happens when these principles are overturned.

[–] expatriado@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

'Murican efficiency bitch!

[–] bookmeat@lemmynsfw.com 23 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Hate to break it to you, but that dude was always corrupt.

[–] Kalothar@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 month ago

Power doesn’t really corrupt, it often reveals

[–] mindlesscrollyparrot@discuss.tchncs.de 18 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The fundamental problem is that, while the people grant power to representatives at elections, there is no mechanism to revoke it. For example, the Senate can impeach the president mid-term, but the people cannot. Nor can they remove their senators or congressional representatives.

[–] krashmo@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You say that like it would help us currently. We keep electing these people. We're clearly not collectively interested in removing them from power.

I don't know about that. There have been a lot of people saying "leopards ate my face". I think it would make a difference if the leopards could be removed after the first bite, instead of being able to keep eating for 5 years.

[–] TomMasz@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago (2 children)

That's why there are (were?) three branches with the intention of balancing each other to some degree. The Founders knew what could happen. They just didn't foresee two of the branches ceding their power to the executive.

[–] mindlesscrollyparrot@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 1 month ago (2 children)

One of the three branches is nominated and confirmed by the other two branches, so you only really have to capture the senate and the presidency, as we have seen.

[–] Zaktor@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Taking the judiciary is a long term project though. It's resistant to short term swings associated with the rise of autocrats. The problem is the Republicans have been moving in this direction for decades.

[–] bob_lemon@feddit.org 1 points 1 month ago

The basic idea of the founders was good, but the US implementation of checks and balances is wildly outdated. There were several points where equivalent powers have proven disastrous in other countries over the last 3 centuries, and the US failed to act upon such data.

[–] FabledAepitaph@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Yeah, the president isn't even supposed to have that much power. It's the party-first subservience in the other two branches, especially the legislative branch, which is exacerbating the issue. And the fact that the state-level governments are bowing down to Der Leader whuch appear to be amplifying his bullshit.

[–] henfredemars@infosec.pub 10 points 1 month ago

I think he was pretty clear about who he was for quite some time.

[–] sylver_dragon@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

If this were a dictatorship it would be a heck of a lot easier... as long as I'm the dictator. Hehehe.

I guess Dubya was kinda prophetic.

[–] TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yah we should get rid of the office of the president

[–] OneSpectra@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Congress has to impeach this guy next year.

[–] TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone 9 points 1 month ago

It's difficult to be hopeful about the DNC doing anything helpful considering the past 40+ years

[–] mikenurre@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

Then you get Peter Thiel controlled puppet Vance. You think he'd back off the project 2025 playbook?

[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Doesn't matter if they impeach him or not, the Senate won't convict him.