371

Judge Unseals New Evidence in Federal Election Case Against Trump (www.nytimes.com)

submitted 2 months ago by silence7@slrpnk.net to c/politics@lemmy.world

37 comments fedilink hide all child comments

The filing itself is here.

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

[-] user134450@feddit.org 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Do you know how many parties had members in the parliament of the Weimar Republic when Hitler was named Chancellor?
I learned in school – not sure if this part is entirely accurate but its an interesting idea anyway – that this situation was precisely why there is a ~5% of votes, lower barrier for parties sending representatives in many modern European democracies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_threshold

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Do you know how many parties had members in the parliament of the Weimar Republic when Hitler was named Chancellor?

No I didn't, that's very interesting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weimar_political_parties

What I don't get is, how Hitler managed to take control with that many parties? He should not have been in a position with power to do that?

[-] user134450@feddit.org 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Trying to remember what i learned in history here, i hope i get at least most of it right:

the political institutions of the Weimar republic were not as balanced and protected from interference as in other democracies
many parties were against the existence of the Weimar Republic
they differed a little in what they wanted instead though, ranging from reintroducing the monarchy with a few republican elements, to full fledged socialism
the difference between the parties made finding compromises very difficult and often resulted in stalemates in the legislative, because of missing checks this did not affect the executive as much though
especially the monarchists liked the idea of heaving a leader that can overrule the parliament if needed and so it was easy for Hitler to get them to agree that they would all be better off with him breaking the stalemate so to speak. So they formed a coalition
see also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harzburg_Front
Those parties also had no qualms with banning other parties just because they disagreed on something, which Hitler was very happy to do, starting with the communists and ending with a complete ban on forming political parties after every serious contender was eliminated

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Thanks that's a very nice summary.

especially the monarchists liked the idea of heaving a leader that can overrule the parliament
I especially noticed this as probably the key practical part in how it was possible.

It's interesting because I've always considered multiple parties to be an important way to protect democracy.
But I guess that ultimately it depends on the people being willing to protect it.
Still having 10 parties represented, makes for a better chance that minority views are represented. And I still believe it helps against corruption and strengthen democracy relative to only 2 parties.

[-] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Same way trump won the primary in 2016, everyone was disunited and a focused minority could overrule them all.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

No it's not the same, Trump is obvious, that's because of the 2 party system, and first past the post.
And people moronically believed Trump was a vote against the political establishment, and for the minimal state.

[-] InverseParallax@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

I mean the GOP primary, the others divided the vote and let him walk away with it.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Sorry my bad, yes that's actually a good point. 👍

this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2024

371 points (99.5% liked)

politics

19238 readers

2114 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News