I am happy to see Ross free.
But I'm still a little shocked, even though I know it's the norm, that a single man (and what a man!) can decide other people's lives based solely on personal political strategy.
I find this display of absolute power horrifying.
Checks and balances. I’m not sure which is more horrifying. An individual having that power, or an entire system of “justice” that allowed Ross’s situation to exist and persist in the first place.
Look at the bright side, at least the president can't jail people as easily as he can pardon them.
Are you sure..?
But it's not really a single man. For Trump to get in that room with that power and that idea, many people must support it.
Yes there's a "press the red button guy" but without that it's impossible to get anything done.
Ross has been pardoned by the will of the people, in a complex series of events that lead to a single final moment. But we can't negate what did support that moment.
We can certainly say that there is a consensus structure behind the person elected, but the final decision I do not think is affected proportionally and “democratically” by the support base.
It seems to me more like a feedback loop designed ad hoc to set the stage for the next step.
This opens another long conversation.
Assuming we "agree" and "know" what democratic means and also that it's a good thing, the debate is: if it's not democratic (?) then the people don't count.
This means that billions of people in history, everywhere, never had a say on anything for millenia.
Which I obviously think is not the case.
There is support and consensus in all power structures, regardless how much "democratic" they are.
Leaderism is bad thinking :)
