Wikipedia

2543 readers

932 users here now

A place to share interesting articles from Wikipedia.

Rules:

Only links to Wikipedia permitted
Please stick to the format "Article Title (other descriptive text/editorialization)"
Tick the NSFW box for submissions with inappropriate thumbnails
On Casual Tuesdays, we allow submissions from wikis other than Wikipedia.

Recommended:

If possible, when submitting please delete the "m." from "en.m.wikipedia.org". This will ensure people clicking from desktop will get the full Wikipedia website.
Use the search box to see if someone has previously submitted an article. Some apps will also notify you if you are resubmitting an article previously shared on Lemmy.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Gödel's Loophole (en.wikipedia.org)

submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

13 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Gödel's Loophole is a supposed "inner contradiction" in the Constitution of the United States which Austrian-American logician, mathematician, and analytic philosopher Kurt Gödel postulated in 1947. The loophole would permit the American democracy to be legally turned into a dictatorship. It has been called "one of the great unsolved problems of constitutional law" by F. E. Guerra-Pujol.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

While everything you said is true, it's also worth mentioning that the intention behind eternity clauses is making such changes significantly more difficult under the existing system. They provide far more security than a system such as Britain's with parliamentary supremacy which prevents Parliament from restricting itself in any way.

Additionally, I believe the psychological difference between a legal constitutional change and one you deem illegal would be massive. It would take much more than a simple supermajority to succeed with such a change, else civil unrest would be the probable result.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

I agree with you on both counts. There’s a vast gulf between what is theoretically possible and what is actual or probable. The edge cases I’m referencing always emerge after seismic shifts in the social fabric—whether rapidly through unexpected war or more gradually via sustained economic instability and the rise of populism.

Notably, the latter seems to be unfolding in some modern democracies. What’s new in this dynamic is the role of contemporary digital communication technologies, particularly their use in mis- and disinformation. These tools enable profound social disruption—often translating into political upheaval—at a fraction of the cost of war. By aligning economic and social tensions with a precision-targeted disinformation campaign, one can manufacture dramatic effects with startling efficiency.