> Risk is being pushed upward instead of owned locally I don't view this as a bad thing or at least not in many contexts, in many orgs, risk is actively pushed downward. Vibe coded PR slop is poor hiring/culture…
You haven't studied well enough as due process being largely secondary to both royal prerogative and parliamentary sovereignty, with there being (even to this day) a scepticism and sometimes outright hostility to the…
It doesn't matter what the federalist papers say, as no one is going to argue that your deep-nativist view aren't also espoused by Publius. You're being informed as to actually, as messy as it might be, what the US is…
This isn't a good argument as the importance of "due process" in British and American systems differs and diverges significantly both currently and historically. Actually if you study British history you'll find that…
> So what? The point is you have a view and the after that fact have found an argument (not a particularly compelling one). Unfortunately (for you) the burden of proof at the very minimum (or maybe more properly on…
The book you cite and more generally the arguments traced in the Deep Roots literature are not very strong and often deployed to support anti-immigrant, anti-assimiliationist views. I'm not persuaded we could recreate…
> Risk is being pushed upward instead of owned locally I don't view this as a bad thing or at least not in many contexts, in many orgs, risk is actively pushed downward. Vibe coded PR slop is poor hiring/culture…
You haven't studied well enough as due process being largely secondary to both royal prerogative and parliamentary sovereignty, with there being (even to this day) a scepticism and sometimes outright hostility to the…
It doesn't matter what the federalist papers say, as no one is going to argue that your deep-nativist view aren't also espoused by Publius. You're being informed as to actually, as messy as it might be, what the US is…
This isn't a good argument as the importance of "due process" in British and American systems differs and diverges significantly both currently and historically. Actually if you study British history you'll find that…
> So what? The point is you have a view and the after that fact have found an argument (not a particularly compelling one). Unfortunately (for you) the burden of proof at the very minimum (or maybe more properly on…
The book you cite and more generally the arguments traced in the Deep Roots literature are not very strong and often deployed to support anti-immigrant, anti-assimiliationist views. I'm not persuaded we could recreate…