Jones Alley
right-wing unmasked
"We will forcefully resist people imposing their will on us through the strength of the majority with a vote."
I have always suspected that the whole "democracy" thing is just a sham to these people. Thanks for the confirmation.
I have always suspected that the whole "democracy" thing is just a sham to these people. Thanks for the confirmation.
posted by Milo Johnson at 12:13 PM
7 Comments:
Rights are subject to majority rule now? I thought a right was "what the individual has, that the majority cannot take away." Aren't rights are the necessary check to the tyranny of self-interest that majority rule can otherwise present?
Man, I gotta stop swallowing whatever bilge these dang card-carrying ACLU libertarians try to foist on me in Civics class.
What a novel conception of "democracy" you have.
Really. So, Bush's "free speech zones" caused you tremendous consternation, right?
Oooh, I regret that last line. Seems snide! My apologies. You seem like a pretty reasonable sort overall, and I don't mean to come off belligerent.
I think I'm turning into some strident libertarian in my old age. I'm really talking less about guns than rights, there. But there is a very deeply-ingrained right to bear arms. I don't think an end-around from the electorate or the judiciary is going to have boo to say to that at this stage in the game.
If can be possible to plan well, educate, and eventually semantic away a legitimate right of the people, but for this right, the work has not been put in and the time is not ripe. The time to semantic away a right is after we've done the hard work to thoroughly finish the job indoctrinating several successive generations of the population, until - effectively no one even really believes in or wants that right. At that point, we can say it has atrophied and dispense with it safely.
But a right like this is going to be very tenacious. As I said, it's very deeply ingrained. It's going to be a long slog to get it to wither to the point where it can be safely pruned.
Again, my apologies for my previous seeming stridency!
Whoop - you've responded already!
Of course they did.
God, that "if" for "it" typo up there is driving me nuts.
I'll shut up now!
I asked my question to try to divine where you were coming from, whether you were a True Believer, "cold dead hands" type or someone who actually supported ALL of the Bill of Rights. I have no desire to take guns away from anybody, but I think that although the 2nd Amendment started out as a right that was of great importance to our fledgling republic that our society has changed enough that there is a certain element of privilege to it as well, in the sense that carrying an automatic weapon to a political rally is a hideous abuse of the right and is done to make a statement more than to simply enjoy a freedom. Time and a place for everything, you know? I hear the gun-worshippers claiming (disingenuously) that this would be a safer country if only there were MORE guns, and that flies in the face of the facts in the worst possible way. All I know is, if I were at a rally where someone showed up with a loaded assault rifle I would leave, certain that they were there to find trouble and not to avoid it. That is a mockery of the Bill of Rights and has no purpose other than to inflame a certain element who wishes to rule regardless of ballot results. And there's no apology necessary with me, you came to have a legitimate conversation instead of to rant, and that is the single most important right we have.
On another note and if I understand correctly, my deepest and most sincere condolences on what appears to be the loss of a treasured feline family member. My co-bloggers and I are owned by nearly thirty beloved kitties and I know the despair and emptiness that comes when it is their time to depart. Purrs and headbonks from my cadre, and may the happy times rise to the top of your memories.
Thank you for the condolences Milo. Yes, Frank was a dear, dear buddy and is much missed.
I fear I may be something worse than a Bill of Rights true believer - I believe the amendments in the bill of rights only enumerate rights, they do not create them. I believe that attempts to legislate away a right are worse than futile, they are dangerous.
Having said that, it is possible to eventually "do away with" a right in the manner I cynically outlined above. Even the right to free speech can be educated against, its validity bled out, its broad support extinguished, and then - only then - can it finally be pruned away. No right exists that is safe once people no longer exist who will fight for it. Government just needs to exercise caution and patience - insurrection really only happens in these cases when governments attempt to prematurely abrogate rights.
As to right vs. privilege, I agree somewhat - in all but the semantics, perhaps! Certainly even our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are subject to being curtailed, given criminal behavior and due process. But I would not say this downgrades them to privilege - oy, semantics.
Post a Comment
<< Home