The Godel Loophole

Wasn't quite sure where I wanted to post this. This is inherently political since it has to do with the US political process, but it's not about any partisian issues. This forum seems like it gets more traffic than the other conspiracy forums, so I felt like putting it here.

So to start, for those unaware this has to do with Kurt Godel. If you don't know who he is, he is essentially one of the most brilliant people to have ever existed. He was a logician, mathematician, and philosopher. In the 30's he fled Nazi Germany and came to the US. Eventually him and Einstein became very good friends, Einstein thought very highly of Godels brilliance. In the mid 40's Godel became a naturalized citizen. As part of preparing for this, Godel intensely studied the US Constitution and this is where things get interesting.

As the story goes, Godel claims that in his study of the Constiution he found a logical inconsistency that would allow for the US to legally be taken over by a dictator. Supposedly he shared this finding with Einstein and Morgenstern who acted as witnesses for his citizenship ceremony. At the ceremony, he tried to share this information with the judge, but was silenced so that he wouldn't come off as a crackpot. Later, he was convined to not talk about it, and those who he told also agreed. The reasoning was, it was better to leave such a dangerous find secret and hope that no one would ever figure it out.

It has been 70 years since that time, and no one has yet definitively proven they've figured out the loophole Godel found.

The most often cited example of the loophole has to do with Article V. For those unaware, Article V governs the process to amend the Constitution. It states that both houses of Congress need to pass an amendment with a 2/3 majority, and that 3/4 of states need to ratify the amendment. It also outlines the process of a convention of states. The powers granted through either of these processes to amend the Constitution are broad, so broad in fact that there are only two restrictions outlined as powers that cannot be changed. The first, is that equal representation for states in the Senate must be maintained. The second is that slavery could not be outlawed before 1808. Obviously, only one of those is relevant today. This theory suggests that the loophole is for a super majority to agree to amend Article V and remove the protection for the Senate. Essentially playing a game of musical chairs in which a single state (or group of states) could be given an overwhelming vote, and thereby control the entire legislature.

In theory, this could be attempted and it would spark a constitutional crisis. Such an action would go to the Supreme Court, but the job of the court is only to rule on the legality of the current action. And since this was done legally, the court could not shoot it down, even though it goes very much against the spirit of the law.

That said, I don't believe this to be the loophole Godel was referring to. His loophole referred to the idea of installing a dictatorship, and while this system would result in a very unfair democracy, it would still be a democracy if the legislature were maintained.

Instead, I think I have figured out another loophole, and unlike the intellectual giants of 100 years ago, I don't believe in locking away knowledge. This may be what Godel was referring to. Essentially, I believe this can be done without a super majority, or even a majority at the federal level. And it can all be done legally.

Step 1: Change the ballot acces rules. We think of our Presidential election as a federal election most often, but it's not. It is a series of 50 state level elections, where each state contributes a different number of points towards a final vote. Then, under federal rules, the candidate that gets over 50% of the total electoral votes becomes the winner. This works fine when there are two major parties, but clearly breaks when there are three or more. However, there is another situation when this breaks. If enough states had no one on the ballot, then it could be made either impossible or highly improbable for anyone to reach 270 votes. For example, out of the 538 electoral votes, the 7 largest states are worth 209 votes. If no one was on their ballots, this would leave only 329 electoral votes up for grabs, meaning that for any candidate to win, they would need 82% of the remaining vote, virtually guaranteeing that no one could win the election.

Such an outcome is actually possible. In researching this idea, I looked into the election process per state. Essentially, every state is free to enact whatever ballot access rules it wants, so long as they are applied consistently to all candidates (with the exception that major party candidates can have different ballot access rules, if they win a party run primary). What this means in practice, is that a state could place such a high bar on getting onto a ballot, that no candidates make it onto the Presidential ballot that year in that state. This takes that states electoral votes out of the pool without actually having to do anything draconian like suspend elections.

Who exactly oversees this process also varies from state to state. This in turn leaves some states more vulnerable than others to such an action. In some states the governor decides on the rules, in others it's the board of elections, and in others it's the secretary of state. This brings us to the next step.

Step 2: Picking the President. So far, the Constitution actually has a system in place to deal with this. In the event that no candidate secures 270 votes, choosing the President goes to the House of Representatives. However, there's a slight caveat to this. Once it goes to the house, each state is only given a single vote regardless of size. Their delegate is picked by that states governor. So it is essentially a special convention rather than the House as a whole. These delegates must pick the next candidate from the three candidates who got the highest EV totals. Essentially, this means that there will be a candidate from each of the major parties, and most likely no one else, as third parties almost never secure any EV's. From here it is a simple majority vote. There's 50 states, so 50 votes. Securing 26 of those will determine the President.

Step 3: So long as a coalition of governors and delegates can be maintained a party can stay in power indefinitely. The Constitution does state that the President cannot exceed two terms, and even if this were to happen that would still be the case. However, just before filling a second term, the President can step down and let their Vice President take over. That person can then be reappointed President and nominate a new VP and so on down the line.

This entire process would not require any constituional amendments, or any overly large party representation. It would require a handful of states to change their ballot access laws, and 26 states in total to appoint a delegation in the House that would support their pick. However, unlike other theories this one can be accomplished purely through the Executive Branch. It would be very unlikely to be prevented through a constitutional amendment, and the courts would not be able to stop it. It could even be accomplished without a majority in Congress.

That is my theory on the Godel Loophole. Thoughts?

a reply to: Aazadan

Correction...he was the most brilliant person to have ever lived!

a reply to: Aazadan

Well, I don't know what loophole Godel was referring to but maybe it was presidential signing statements on laws.

But regardless, language alone does not create legitimacy of our Constitution or government. There's a saying the way to become a leader is to find a parade and step in front of it.

In 2003, I was protesting the Iraq war in DC. As we were marching, on one of the corners was this super hot girl standing on top of a 15 foot bolder with a megaphone. She had the coolest outfit. Her camo shirts showed off a very fine set of wheels. In really defiant stance on top this bolder with her beautiful legs hanging out she's shouting into the megaphone, "WHAT DOES DEMOCRACY LOOK LIKE?" The people in the crowd responding to her amazingly cool vibe screamed back in unison, "THIS IS WHAT DEMOCRACY LOOKS LIKE." It was one the most profound experiences I've ever had in true government.

Don't loose site no matter how much the people in power think they can screw us, at some point, the people will take democracy back into their own hands regardless whatever tyranny has been established by law. At some point, people will respond to the latest King Louis.

P.S. During the march there were a bunch of woman naked from the waste up carry signs that said, "breasts for peace" They were fun to march with!

originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Aazadan

Correction...he was the most brilliant person to have ever lived!

That remains to be seen. He was able to offer up a reasonable counter argument to Einsteins Theory of Relativity, which modified a few parts, and allows for among other things, a concept of time travel. Einstein himself thought Godel was right about these theories. If that ever happens to be proven he will no doubt take the title of the most brilliant person ever.

For now, he is just one of many.

But, I would like to focus on his constitutional loophole. Worth keeping in mind, while Godel was exceptionally skilled at logic he was not a lawyer. It is entirely possible that his loophole stemmed from a misunderstanding of the definition of a common word vs the definition of that same word in a legal setting. That said, I don't believe that to be the case. I think he found something, and I think the scenario I just outlined is one possible loophole which he may have found.

a reply to: Aazadan

Here's why he's the most brilliant person ever. If extraterrestrials came down to visit us and examined everything in our culture, all our current scientific understanding, our standard model in physics, every book ever written, all the commentaries, they would come to Godel's Incompleteness Theorem and say it is the one truth humanity has discovered that will stand for ALL time.

a reply to: Aazadan

Hmmm. 🤔
Yep.
Sending this to Trump right away. 👍😁 👑

a reply to: Aazadan

1 - just because a person claims to " have found something " - yet presents zero evidence - does not mean they hae

yet you have already assumed that " goddels loophole " -= a valid propisition

2 - tesla , einsteinand many others have all been wrong on various issues

3 - the principle of " pst ... theres a " flaw " in the consitution to permit totaliarianism ... only i know what it is ... and i am not telling you plebs ................because its secret .... and i hope no one figures it out "

is so utterly assanine - it hurts

4 - citation required the tail lacks any primary sources

originally posted by:

4 - citation required the tail lacks any primary sources

Sorry, I don’t believe in citing common knowledge you should already have. It’s not my job to supplement your education. Besides, the main point is in my theory, not in the background information.

a reply to: Aazadan

actually - it is - your job - its your thread

you are appealing to the authority of goddel - that the alledged loophole exists

so - pplease cite a primary source detailing the " fact " that goddel opined this " loophole "

a reply to: ignorant_ape

You’re completely missing the point. He thought he found one, but he didn’t specify what it was publicly. People have over time theorized what a possible loophole is. Which usually revolve around Article V. However the most often cited idea in such a loophole isn’t really much of a loophole at all. And I pointed out why. The point is the theory I put forward for an actual loophole, which may or may not be what Gödel believed he found.

a reply to: Aazadan

no you miss the point

there MAY be a flaw // loophole in the consitution of the USA

but - why do you credit its discovery to goddel ???????????????????

its a simple question - as written - the tail of goddels loophole could only origionate from one og 4 people

none of whom ACTUALLY mentioned it

if you are goimg to continue to claim its " godels loophole " - cite a prim,ary source that links this to kurt godel

its that simple

originally posted by: ignorant_ape
there MAY be a flaw // loophole in the consitution of the USA

but - why do you credit its discovery to goddel ???????????????????

It was a backstory for the premise of my theory. Care to comment on that part?

a reply to: Aazadan

Be careful - you may be banging your head against a very thick brick wall here - something which has been known to bring about headaches in times past. As for your theory, you seem to be on-point, at least in that your theory seems logically valid, though I'm no expert in the US constitution & will therefore leave it up to minds wiser than my own to debate your reasoning.