Is the future of western democracies a judicial authoritarianism?

[wtfNeedSignUp]

At least in the country where I live (Israel) I've noticed that the democracy here is progressively going towards a destination where judicial system is above every other parts of the government and is the de-facto ruler of the country without any actual way to democratically depose them. To put it in bullet points:

• The judicial system can create new laws and remove existing laws through Judicial activism, and can do so without the need of any government majority or support from the populace.
• The current parliament wants to make a law that will disallow people with a criminal investigation against them (not actual court verdict) from being in the government. Which means the courts (who are already is very specific on which political sides they allow to be investigated and which aren't) can decide who you are allowed to vote for as long as someone will press charges.
• The top of the judicial system is made almost entirely of leftists who went to the same schools.
• Assigments to new people to the top of the judicial system needs the support of the judicial system.

I'm not so knowledgable on other countries and their judicial system but it seems the USA is also the same, with passing divisive gay marriage through court rather than legislation, reject looking into allegations in the recent elections and doesn't seem to actively punish crimes made by specific political sides like Antifa.

So my question is whether this is just something in my country, or is it a large push for a way to "bypass" democracy and have the courts as an aristocracy that decides the laws and doesn't allow any outsiders to get in.

 

[Maurice Caine]

At least in the country where I live (Israel)

 

[Alexander Thaut]

At least in the country where I live (Israel)

but i think the problem with judicial authoritarianism is that it kinda puts too much into the hands of the judges.

 

[DumbDude42]

in some ways this is already the case. in america for example both abortion and gay marriage were established not by a law passed in parliament, and not by presidential decree either, but because the courts decided to make it so. and since nobody but the courts themselves can overturn or overrule the courts decisions, here we are.

its similar in a bunch of european countries as well. the judiciary is the highest authority, outranking the legislative and executive institutions.

 

[Penis Drager]

At least in the country where I live (Israel)

Lol. Jew.

 

[Syaoran Li]

I'd say with America, it's more of the large corporations being above the law and the de facto true government, although legislating from the bench is also a major issue as well, one that the corporate elites use to their advantage along with the tried and true tactics of buying off both parties and invoking the "muh private company" defense any time someone tries to hold them accountable.

In America, Wall Street and Silicon Valley are the new aristocracy with Woke Leftism and "Science" as the new church. The judiciary and the politicians are merely the tools they use to solidify their de facto control of the country.

 

[Duke Nukem]

I'd say with America, it's more of the large corporations being above the law and the de facto true government, although legislating from the bench is also a major issue as well, one that the corporate elites use to their advantage along with the tried and true tactics of buying off both parties and invoking the "muh private company" defense any time someone tries to hold them accountable.

In America, Wall Street and Silicon Valley are the new aristocracy with Woke Leftism and "Science" as the new church. The judiciary and the politicians are merely the tools they use to solidify their de facto control of the country.

And even worse, critics will be silenced in any way possible just to keep things going the way they are. We're in for some dark times.

 

[PaleTay]

Yes, it will be ruled by courts and academia who are owned by private interests. Canada's Supreme Court recently ruled Carbon taxes lawful because it agrees with their morality for example, or America's Obamacare.

 

[Slap47]

I think the best example of this is the United Kingdom. They are quickly transitioning from parliamentary supremacy towards courts having the power.

 

[Lone MacReady]

My opinion is that of Samuel Hyde's, that we live in a "Gay tech oligarchy".

 

[Liber Pater]

It's called kritarchy and it's how ancient Israel was run (I'm sure you're familiar with the Sanhedrin), so it's no surprise that Israel today is run in a similar fashion.
It has been exported to basically every country where your people have power (e.g. US, UK, EU, Canada, etc)
See also: kritrocracy (similar concept). Appropriately, this later term was brought up in the context of debate over the Brown v. Board of Education case, which was a perfect instance of kritarchy in action.

 

[Milkis]

In America, Wall Street and Silicon Valley are the new aristocracy with Woke Leftism and "Science" as the new church. The judiciary and the politicians are merely the tools they use to solidify their de facto control of the country.

More specifially I think corporations are the szlachta, and the "private corporation" defense is their version of the Golden Liberty. Nothing can happen in the US if a corporation objects, and their rights are so strong that the legislature of the central government is enfeebled and stalemated.

Golden Liberty - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[KingCoelacanth]

So my question is whether this is just something in my country, or is it a large push for a way to "bypass" democracy and have the courts as an aristocracy that decides the laws and doesn't allow any outsiders to get in.

Something like this is happening in Poland and Hungary, where the EU is trying to get control of their courts to override the nations' democracy. Courts are unelected officials who have an ultimate mandate that can only be reversed by more powerful courts. Ignoring courts is generally seen as a massive red flag.
Of course, any leader who has enough popular support could just ignore courts as they please, assuming they have enough support from the rest of the government and military. But this gives foreign countries an excuse to meddle in their internal affairs.

 

[Kosher Dill]

When have Western democracies not been effectively ruled by courts?
Recommended reading: Our Judicial Oligarchy, by Gilbert Roe, an American Progressive writing in 1912. At the time, Congress' legislation on issues like antitrust and workers' rights was strangled by a reactionary Supreme Court that relied on strained readings, petty technicalities, and callbacks to English common law to proclaim statutes they disliked "meaningless" and void.

Today the politics of the Court has shifted, as well as their favored arguments, but the principle still holds. Roe's proposed solution was electing judges, but I'm not so sure about that.

 

[Coolio55]

I think the best example of this is the United Kingdom. They are quickly transitioning from parliamentary supremacy towards courts having the power.

True, but that's only to shift blame. Parliament can change the judgement when they actually don't like it.

 

[Yinci]

Pretty much seems like it. It seems to be the worst in the United States of course. I feel like there might be a split between the United States and the rest of the western world soon. The Canadians and Europeans are their own bloc and India is currently starting world war 3 with Pakistan beginning with a Muslim holocaust.

If the United States can't bring it's people together then it is just a dead man walking and judicial authoritarian is just the state waiting for death. It is the shittiest form of government I have ever heard of I can tell by it's name.

 

[jje100010001]

In America, Wall Street and Silicon Valley are the new aristocracy with Woke Leftism and "Science" as the new church. The judiciary and the politicians are merely the tools they use to solidify their de facto control of the country.

Interesting recent take:

https://niccolo.substack.com/p/the-dushanbe-interviews-christopher

 

[CWCissey]

Corporate police states are the foreseeable future.

 

[Jarolleon]

To be fair, Israel was ruled by judges in Biblical times so it's just a return to tradition.

I'd say with America, it's more of the large corporations being above the law and the de facto true government, although legislating from the bench is also a major issue as well, one that the corporate elites use to their advantage along with the tried and true tactics of buying off both parties and invoking the "muh private company" defense any time someone tries to hold them accountable.

In America, Wall Street and Silicon Valley are the new aristocracy with Woke Leftism and "Science" as the new church. The judiciary and the politicians are merely the tools they use to solidify their de facto control of the country.

Kind of makes sense for judges to be so prominent in enforcing it. Have you noticed how all woke shit tends towards giving advantages to people with university degrees? It's the old Puritan over-valuing of lecture-style education wrapped up in new tenets, and those tenets just happen to require constant self-criticism to "do better", perpetual worrying about whether something you do affects this or that group or ecosystem, and require one to jump through ever-changing and convoluted mental hoops to be virtuous, and encylopedic knowledge of every marginal identity to avoid offending people, things that people with university degrees tend to be better at. Someone with a sociology degree, law PhD and a robe telling you how things ought to be is the logical continuation of that.

 

[(not) y2k compliant]

When have Western democracies not been effectively ruled by courts?
Recommended reading: Our Judicial Oligarchy, by Gilbert Roe, an American Progressive writing in 1912. At the time, Congress' legislation on issues like antitrust and workers' rights was strangled by a reactionary Supreme Court that relied on strained readings, petty technicalities, and callbacks to English common law to proclaim statutes they disliked "meaningless" and void.

Today the politics of the Court has shifted, as well as their favored arguments, but the principle still holds. Roe's proposed solution was electing judges, but I'm not so sure about that.

Adding that book to my reading list. For anyone else interested, found a decent scan of the book on Archive that does include EPUB and PDF formats;

Our judicial oligarchy : Roe, Gilbert E. (Gilbert Ernstein), 1865-1929 : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

archive.org