• Wheaties [she/her]
      ·
      3 years ago

      This isn't a crisis, this is the system acting as intended. The oldest political tradition in the U.S. is kicking the can down the road.

      "All men are created equal. Except the ones we own. But that's fine because it will solve itself in a generation or two and these questions are really starting to bum me out."

      "OK, fine, slaves are free. Free to work the same land they were already working, but this time for a wage! ...aaaand that's all the time we have for systemic change, I'm sure it will work out fine."

      "Oh, sure the market just did the biggest crash in the history of there being a stock market, but if we do nothing, clearly the problem will solve itself."

      "GRID? Well if you're not gay, why even talk about it? Oh, anyone can get it? Well, we've already committed to not addressing this, so sorry, best wishes!"

      "Covid...?"

      • Speaker [e/em/eir]
        ·
        3 years ago

        A constitutional crisis is an event in which a government cannot fulfill its basic functions for whatever reason. That the Amerikkkan government is riven with them constantly doesn't make it not such an event, it speaks to the absolute joke that burgers will fight and die for.

        • Wheaties [she/her]
          ·
          3 years ago

          ah, pardon me. I thought it meant something like "crisis of legitimacy" and/or "point where the rules conflict or don't cover"

          • Speaker [e/em/eir]
            ·
            3 years ago

            There's definitely a lot of overlap, there, to be totally fair. The usual reason for such things is the equivalent of "there's no rule that says a dog can't play basketball", except that it nearly always kills millions of people.

        • SoyViking [he/him]
          ·
          3 years ago

          Can you call it a constitutional crisis if the problem isn't that the government cannot fulfill its basic functions but rather that it refuses to do so?

          • Speaker [e/em/eir]
            ·
            3 years ago

            Sure. When you're a globe-bestriding empire, there's no particular difference between the two things, but in particular making the judgment that your government has no power to handle a major pandemic and that it should be handed off to some other body (or 50 of them) is pretty textbook. The reasoning will always be some procedural nonsense about what powers are actually granted by <fill in your body of law of choice>. As ever, the feds have all the power in the world when it comes to robbing you (and everyone else around the planet) of life, liberty, and dignity, but are utterly shackled when it comes to keeping you safe.