Can American democracy survive its betrayal by the government?

Mark LeVine discusses recent events at Al Jazeera.

Depending on your point of view, the last few weeks have sounded either a very loud wake-up call or the death knell of democracy in the United States, at least for the foreseeable future.

For the first time in generations, American citizens have been betrayed, and indeed, attacked, not merely by one over-reaching branch of government, but by all three. The actions of President Obama and the Congress as revealed in the the Snowden Affair, and the revelations of the NSA’s activities it has brought to light, and now the Supreme Court’s decision effectively to overturn the Voting Rights Act, show conclusively that Americans today can no longer trust their government to protect their most fundamental rights, either in principle or against the abuse by one or more arms of the state.



2 Replies to “Can American democracy survive its betrayal by the government?”

  1. “and now the Supreme Court’s decision effectively to overturn the Voting Rights Act,”

    Ignoring, for a moment, that close to one hundred percent of recent memory’s preclearance challenges were answered conclusively by the states there’s no way one can make the jump that without preclearance (shall we say, euphemistically) ‘possibilities’ then the whole VRA is overturned. At the absolute least the laws in question still have to pass Section 2 muster, and no matter how badly your politics want to say otherwise Section 2 challenges are handled very seriously.

    There’s no reason to reblog hysteria.

  2. I would say that this article is a bit over-the-top, but “hysteria” is likewise excessive. There really is something going on, and I think even lefties must admit that the once named “dream president” is just accelerating what used to be thought of as right-wing positions. The author of the article’s point that all three branches of government are in alignment is an intriguing and prima facie plausible point. You ignore that and focus on a small point that even if true does not change the author’s larger conclusion. Hence, your implicit argument is fallaciously beside the point once I indicate the reason I posted it.

    Please do keep in mind that reblogging something does not indicate acceptance, especially total acceptance. Yes, I am far more likely to reblog something that I appreciate with in some way, but I often remain silent on what and why.

    Finally, apologies that the comment was moderated: I’m trying to figure out how to have completely open comments. Oh, and a word of advice, your choice of email just invites ad hominem attacks; I would recommend using another one.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s