MarxusMaximus [comrade/them]

This man’s Wikipedia talk page has a discussion about whether or not praising Hitler as the greatest leader in history and constantly quoting Mein Kampf makes you a Nazi and they landed on no. Until the NYT calls him a Nazi, he’s a far right activist.

Okay, I think I understand. Trump wants to fuck with Biden’s legacy who wants to fuck with Trump’s legacy who wants to fuck with Obama’s legacy and so forth. Term limits are good in the US because fuck the US.

But even without term limits the president would have to spend just as much time focusing on campaigning, right? You would still have the same amount of elections. The president would still spend just as much time ruling the empire as now.

So term limits make a lot of sense in ineffectual systems of government that are more focused on the spectacle of campaigning and elections than the actual governing? I can definitely see how political apathy would lead to incumbents running unopposed but I’m not sure I understand how a lack of term limits automatically benefit the incumbent, other in the fact that they literally have to step down once they reach the limit.

I don’t think any party has ever had term limits imposed on it’s leadership. I remember when the PRC removed their term limits on the (effectively ceremonial) position of president and the US media apparatus freaked out. The media apparatus in other western countries where term limits aren’t a thing had to invite specialist commentators to explain why a lack of term limits in China means dictatorship but it’s all fine in Europe.

Are term limits conceptually good? Aren’t they just arbitrary?