[JKCalhoun]

You seem to be doing a cost/benefit analysis. The sense we have is that the people doing the dismantling either have not done such an analysis or are at the very least keeping it from the public.

[Suzuran]

They have absolutely done a cost/benefit analysis. It works like this: "If it does not benefit me personally, directly and financially, then it costs too much."

[Yeul]

In my country such things are discussed in parliament during endless sessions about the yearly budget. They are not decreed by a god emperor at a whim.

[skeeter2020]

I find this hard to believe. Every country has various conditions and scenarios where the leader is granted god-like powers. ex: In Canada Trudeau invoked the Emergencies Act for the first time ever during covid. My understanding is that it was intended for 9/11-type actions, not protesters who should have been arrested weeks earlier. What country are you in?

[AlexandrB]

This is not quite correct. The Emergencies Act was preceded by the War Measures Act which was used during WWI and WWII as well as during the "October Crisis"[1].

But yes, the intent is for events that threaten the nation, not protests.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/October_Crisis

[ethbr1]

The nature of extraordinary powers' existence is that they will be used. You'd have thought the Roman Rep^H^H^HEmpire would have taught everyone that.

The only defense is to inalienably assign certain rights/protections to individuals. (Which itself creates issues with their abusing them)

[mrguyorama]

This is rhetorical sleight of hand.

There is no physical force in the universe that causes words written on a government letterhead to mean anything. The exact same government that granted you "inalienable rights" will ignore them when it's corrupted.

There is no way to construct a government such that it CANNOT execute a minority if enough people want that to happen.

The only answer, as it has always been, is to ceaselessly, diligently, and without fail, never vote in people like Trump.

Unfortunately, the republican party has spent every single moment since Nixon's resignation ensuring that the party would never let that kind of thing stop them again.

[ethbr1]

> The exact same government that granted you "inalienable rights" will ignore them when it's corrupted.

Checks and balances, multiple branches aligned along different timescales, and mandatory minimum change periods. E.g. the states that require consitutional amendments to be voted for in two consecutive elections

And all of that buttressed by belief in institutions and the consistency that effects.

It takes time to change people's minds.