• JayObey711@lemmy.worldEnglish
    67·
    5 months ago

    We still don’t know if Hitler’s party burned down the Parliament or if it was a convenient coincidence for him. All we know is that there was a fully worked out bill on the president table just a few hours later which uses this extreme circumstance to break the law (and eventually establish a dictatorship). Seems awfully suspicious

  • ynazuma@lemmy.worldEnglish
    19·
    5 months ago

    This applies to any justification for breaking the law. If you generate a perverse incentive, someone will take advantage of it

  • OutOfMemoryEnglish
    41·
    5 months ago

    I agree in principle, but I’m not sure what a good alternative is in the US today. In a crisis the laws would have to stay ahead of the executive responses to novel situations, and the legislature couldn’t pass a law that fast if there was an angry mob at the door.

    • Wogi@lemmy.worldEnglish
      191·
      5 months ago

      Establish a defined set of emergency powers that exist for a predetermined amount of time, with an extremely narrow scope. Which can only be extended for a brief period of time with a 2/3rds majority vote. Otherwise they end and the executive is removed from office and barred from ever holding an official position again.

      If there are barbarians at the gates, and emergency powers are actually required, then fine, you can have them to deal with a highly specific crisis. None of this “war on terror” bullshit.

      And it’ll be the last thing you’ll do.

      • FisicoDelirante@lemmy.mlEnglish
        2·
        5 months ago

        I’ll add that absolutely no measure taken should extend for a minute after the emergency is resolved.

      • OutOfMemoryEnglish
        1·
        5 months ago

        I like that actually, a “break glass” provision in the emergency powers law! It’s so obvious in hindsight.