This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Note that the entire concept of an "independent" agency does not make sense under Constitutional theory or a theory of actual democracy. If it's "independent" ... who then holds it accountable to the public (democratic) interest? How does this foot with the "full executive power" clause that puts executive power under the President's chain-of-command.
It's simple really, you don't live in a constitutional republic but in a managerial state where a conglomeration of organizations with various levels of ties to the State interlock in a bureaucracy that produces "government" and is usually called "democracy".
The President is but a cog in this complex machine. And so are elections. The EU works this way as well, and so does most of the West. The banking system is setup this way (FATCA, FED, etc), foreign policy is setup this way, pretty much everything is setup this way, even the army to some degree. As this conglomeration of NGOs, QUANGOs, private enterprises and government departments with various degrees of control over each other but a great deal of insulation from political control (this is usually called "independence").
When people talk about the "deep state", this is who they mean.
Exactly so.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It doesn't make sense to me. Didn't the POTUS appoint the Administrator, which then should have been confirmed by the Senate? Just like with other Departments? And then Congress does oversight and control (and public through it)? There is certain autonomy in how USAID defines its priorities, but please point me at a paragraph in the Big Book of Constitutional Democracy (or wherever the “theory of actual democracy” described; and no, US Constitution is not that) where it is laid out that President should not just have his finger in every pie (department, bureau and office), but also actively stir with that finger. DOGE has less accountability than USAID.
"The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. "
Congress's power: "All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills." "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time."
So Congress raises the money, puts it in the treasury, and gives the executive branch authorization to spend it. It never says the executive has to spend it. And "executive power" means the ability to hire and fire, to give orders, to fire people if they don't follow those orders, to suspend payments if a department is squandering the money, to audit the books etc. That is what the executive in any organization does.
It sounds like you think the President is vestigal organ that shouldn't exist. In your view, Congress establishes civil service rules that controls personnel and management of an agency, Congress controls the budget, the President has no power whatsoever. And indeed, that's how the government actually has been running the past 70 years, but that's not how the Constitution was designed. In reality, I think the Constitution was intentionally or unintentionally flexible about which branch of government is Supreme. But Congress and the bureaucracy lost the mandate of heaven, and Trump and Elon are attempting to acquire it.
DOGE is Obama's U.S. digital service renamed, it is authorized to help make all government departments more efficient, and it reports directly to the Chief of Staff who reports to the President. Additionally, the DOGE team members embedded in agencies report to that agency head. Read here: https://x.com/RenzTom/status/1887038876000079945
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link