|
|
|
|
|
|
by good_gnu
3219 days ago
|
|
|
Generally, the rationale of term limits seems to be to prevent a dictatorial or monarchistic system from emerging. However, consider the rise of the National Socialists in Germany: In 1930, they first got a result > 3% in a federal election. By the end of 1933 all other political parties were banned. No practical term limit could have prevented this dictatorship, even though they never got more than 44% of the vote in a federal election, i.e. never enough to really change the constitution by democratic means. So we definitely know that term limits are not a completely reliable measure. |
|
|
In Brazil, we didn't had reelections in the executive branch. 20 years ago the president bribed the Congress to change the Constitution so he could be reelected.
It has been a disaster!
The person in power would use all the government machine for his/her reelection. The election of a second term becomes almost a plebiscite of yes/no if the person must continue.
The renovation of the elected politicians has come almost to a halt. The emergence of new politicians were stifled. A real mess.