7 Comments

100% correct

Expand full comment

Similar story in Britain. Left wingers getting all misty eyed and outraged when any elected politician suggests bypassing our own supreme court, which has only been around since 2005.

Expand full comment

Frankly, I was baffled when I found out that Britain decided to create a Supreme Court in 2005 - as if they hadn't been paying any attention to what its American counterpart had been doing for the last forty years! (For what it's worth, I think the previous system - where the House of Lords was in theory tje highest judicial body but very rarely did anything - worked just fine.)

But nowadays you are having people getting jailed for their social media posts while actual rapists get let off with community service, and your highest judicial body is presumably OK with this. Maybe if y'all had studied a bit more 🇺🇸 history before making big decisions, it wouldn't have come to this.

Expand full comment

The late New Labour government had a weird fetish for 'consitutionalism', which actually meant just copying either the US or further integrated within the EU regardless if there was any merit to the idea.

Yes, the old system with the Law Lords was rather neat.

Expand full comment

Another bulls-eye!

So the obvious question is, given that the Left will not control the elected national government for the next four years, and does not control the Supreme Court, what can be done to pry their hands from the levers of power they now have?

We are not going to repeat the 1950s, and demand a loyalty oath from teachers and professors.

We are not going to nationalize the press and other media.

So ... what should we do? This requires thinking about.

Expand full comment

I'm not confident that Republicans can "do" much in a second Trump term - after all Trump's House majority is really thin, and there are a lot of existential issues on which R's are as weak as D's (about a week ago Rand Paul proposed a Senate amendment to raise the Social Security age to 70... it failed 93-3... right as Congress was passing a bipartisan bill to make the whole program more expensive... and SS & Medicare & interest on debt are what's actually eating about 70% of our ballooning budget - not anything DOGE is going to fix.

The main good thing about Trump is that he put so much of the judiciary under originalist control, which will make it easier for state and local governments to step up to the plate and exercise more autonomy as the country gets poorer and the central government keeps imploding. For me an "optimistic" future is one where the US comes to resemble the Holy Roman Empire (i.e. a single empire on paper but dozens of sovereignties of various sizes and shapes in practice) and a bad future is one where it resembles Eastern Rome/Byzantium (i.e. a single, highly-centralized, autocratic state occupying the shell of the much greater Republic that it once was.)

The other good thing about Trump (which I've touched on in other essays) is that he's likely to shock the democracies of Europe and Asia into taking more responsibility for their own defense, so they're more likely to survive their eventual abandonment by the US (which will happen no matter which party wins in America - just witness what happened to Ukraine under the presidencies of Obama and Biden.)

Expand full comment

Well, DOGE is probably the right idea. Dismantle the administrative state.

Expand full comment