434
this post was submitted on 27 Sep 2026
434 points (98.9% liked)
Technology
88271 readers
3147 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Its never been worse. The US has been checkmated by:
I'm going to take issue with this statement. Nobody has checkmated the US. If we have to stay in this metaphor, the US checkmated itself.
One of the biggest mistakes was to allot the same number of votes to Rhode Island as to California in the senate. A more proportionate voting system would do wonders for half the issues you listed. Appointing judges for life is another one. Financing election campaigns like that is also mad. Nobody forced Americans to do business like that.
This isn't a game of chess where checkmate is irreversible. The sooner folks stop formulating arguments why I'm wrong or why these are insurmountable hurdles, the better for all of us.
While I do agree that with the cult clown car people in charge of the executive right now, there is an added difficulty to passing legislation. The Epstein Act part 1 has shown though there are ways. So regulation on so-called AI is still possible and not late like the article seems to suggest.
The problem is a lot of this is checkmate. How do you reverse any of these massive changes your advocating? Pretty sure its going to require some majority or plurality of parties ~~some~~ many of whom may be similar to RI in their interest in not having their voice degraded?
How do you do that non-violently or in some less than multilateral way
You're formulating arguments why I'm wrong. With the greatest of respect, that's defeatism speaking. Difficult? Yes. Checkmate? No. It may take a crisis to get this going; the New Deal didn't come from nowhere either.
You cannot fix all of these issues at once. You probably cannot fix a lot of these issues without first improving education levels within the population. A journey of 1000 miles begins with the first step.
Term limits for SC judges to some odd number of years for any new appointees is something both sides will be able to agree on. If nobody tries though, of course it won't happen.
1 party, but its a coalition of 2 parties.
Only in the sense that a supermajority of our Congress is beholden to the oligarchs on economic issues, sure, but there is even a minority but growing wing of progressives who need our support.
Meanwhile, on social issues - things like human rights - there is rather more difference between the two parties. Anyone can look at what the support, and while establishment Democrats tend not to be extremely forceful about protecting human rights as much as progressives would like, they are worlds apart from the fascists who are trying to instill Christian nationalism.
Uniparty