I was going to bypass this article as one of many articles encouraging citizens to be more responsible for their vote. That will improve democarcy, right?
But this article did quote a book I have recently read. Here is my review:
I found it interesting that this essay's writer did not bring up the same conclusion as the writers of "How Democracies Die."
In a nutshell, both US parties made a dramatic change for their internal 1972 election. Both cast aside their convention-style selection process more in favor of the primary selection. This reduced the influence the back-room deals being struck by the upper echelons of the party--and increased the influence of rank-and-file party members, many of whom have not really participated in politics other than voting.
Reading between the lines of Livitsky & Ziblatt's work, Donald Trump would not have been elected as the Republican candidate with the pre-1972 rules. THe upper echelons of party would have found some way to cast him aside much earlier in the primary. But with the rules now in place, they were powerless. In other words, there was no "filter."
So the writer of this essay asks us to be more aware and vote smarter. Even if she could convince a few of us so, how will this work when the rules still allow someone like Mr. Trump through an open window?
Mr. Trump came pretty close to being able to declare martial law and suspend Congress "until things were safer." Without Mr. Biden being formally certified, the military would have had little choice to go with that command from the commander-in-chief. The Constitution says the certification process must happen before the transfer power. The military is to obey the Constitution.
So many Medium writers have no idea on how to fix democracy.