• lime!@feddit.nuEnglish
    421·
    11 days ago

    because political dissidents who are in jail for trying to overthrow a dictatorship should also be able to run. it’s one of those unfortunate situations where this would be a good thing to have under an authoritarian government…

    • Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish
      201·
      11 days ago

      Under an authorisation government though I assume the law would be rescinded, so it’s not really protecting anybody.

      • OsrsNeedsF2P@lemmy.mlEnglish
        113·
        11 days ago

        I mean becoming an authoritarian government to prevent an authoritarian government doesn’t really make sense

        • Echo Dot@feddit.ukEnglish
          11·
          11 days ago

          That’s like saying we shouldn’t send anyone to prison because some of them might be innocent. You have to try your best with a system but that system has to be robust enough that it cannot be abused otherwise it will end up being abused.

          • Contravariant@lemmy.worldEnglish
            3·
            10 days ago

            If you want a system that cannot be abused then don’t remove the safeguards designed to fix mistakes.

            Allowed innocents to be released from prison, and allow the disenfranchised to regain their voting rights.

            This is why there is always a higher power to overrule previous decisions, and when it comes to elections there is no higher power than a majority.

      • lime!@feddit.nuEnglish
        131·
        11 days ago

        of course not. the american “system of checks and balances” only works if everyone plays by the rules.