site banner
PaperclipPerfector  19d ago (text post)   2557 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for February 2, 2025

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

1
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread?

Yes. Why is Trump going all out on executive orders despite Republicans controlling congress? Next time a Dem wins it can all be undone, and if Dems win the midterms, there will be zero chance of passing legislation. Are there too many Never Trump Republicans? Does all the important legislation require a 60% majority? Is the Trump admin working on legislation that I've missed? What's up?

Because it's much harder to stop an EO that does X than pass a law that authorizes the executive to do the same. Trump's EO's are within the acceptable range of what the GOP in congress approves of, but they are not their preferred solutions.

Loud Democratic opposition to the EOs may galvanise congress to pass the same thing as bills. That's more or less how Brexit got through - the original vote was fairly split, as was parliament, but the sheer scale of anti-democratic pushback galvanised a 'fuck you' landslide at the next election.

It's not so much never Trump Republicans as it is that the majority in the House is narrower than the number of total wingnutz who won't reliably agree to anything at all in the Republican caucus.

We're just over a week into the administration. Legislation doesn't move this fast. Further, it seems to me that these actions can serve as a proof of concept, which congress can then cement at their more measured pace.

Further still, while the GOP has largely been conquered by MAGA, there are still significant pockets of resistance to be mopped up. Try to do all this through the legislative branch, and you drastically increase your attack surface.

Also, EOs are much more flexible and dynamic. You can make EO today, see how it goes for a week and amend or rescind it in a week. You usually won't be able to do anything like that with legislation.

But some of it it's not easy to undo. I.e., for example, if Trump closes USAID, in 4 years democrats may create another one, but it won't be the same one as they have now, they'd have to work for a long time to rebuild it to match what it is today. Same e.g. for DEI in federal government - it took years to build all that bureaucratic infrastructure, and if it will be gone, it will take years to rebuild. And Trump has 4 years to try and make the law preventing it that would survive judicial scrutiny. There's no rush in that.

We're just over a week into the administration. Legislation doesn't move this fast.

Specifically, this page shows that literally zero substantive bills have even made it out of committee so far.

(Votes have been taken on a few dozen relatively minor bills by suspending the rule that requires a bill to be approved by a committee first. You can see the details by clicking on one of those bills—e. g., the Wounded Knee Massacre Memorial and Sacred Site Act—and selecting the "Actions" tab.)

Thanks. Using EOs as trial balloons for future legislation make sense to me.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats