The Federalist folks are discussing the Trump indictments. They’re not exactly Trump fans, but they do treat this mess as an unfair prosecution, a use of “legal” techniques to accomplish a purpose that should be done politically.
And there’s the real problem.
WE CAN’T REMOVE A LEADER POLITICALLY.
IT’S PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.
Impeachment was a terrible idea when it was first written into the document, and it became an IMPOSSIBLE idea in 1804 when the “election” system was revised. At first the electors were meant to decide among all candidates regardless of party. The top vote-getter became president and the second became VP. Under that setup, removing the P would automatically move the #2 into place, and the #2 would “typically” be an opponent of #1, so the course of decisions would change. In 1804 the party setup was formalized, but without changing the impeachment procedure. Since then the procedure is totally useless, and CONGRESS KNOWS IT.
I’m not inclined to blame systems; I’ve seen through long experience that bad government or bad corporate leadership is personal, not systematic. When an executive is fired for “Communism” or “Altrightfascism” or “sexual harassment” or any of that shit, he was really fired because he was incompetent or disliked. It’s always personal in the end.
In this particular situation I can confidently make an exception, because we have a PERFECT CONTROLLED EXPERIMENT proving that a different system DOES work better. What’s more, it’s the same system our NYC tax evaders abandoned in 1776 to give NYC more advantage.
The British parliament can and does remove bad prime ministers by a purely political procedure. It’s not theoretical or obsolete; we’ve seen it work several times in recent years, including this year.
The prime minister is not an executive employed by the government. He is employed BY THE MAJORITY PARTY, and the party can replace him easily and smoothly without any “legal” trials or appeals, whenever he proves to be unfit for the current purpose. He’s not convicted or jailed or removed from all power; he can stay in parliament if he wants. He is simply the wrong leader for present conditions, and he may turn out to be the right leader under different conditions, as happened with Churchill.
We don’t need a revolution, we need a RESTORATION. The British system worked then and still works now. It responds to changed conditions quickly and smoothly, as a proper feedback system should. Our fucked system was wrong in 1776 and became worse every year since.
Polistra's Mill 