As the media attempt to grapple with this felt reality, they reach over and over for the same word: polarization. That, we're told, is the shorthand for what has gone wrong. Where once the country had its share of conservative Democrats, liberal Republicans, and mushy moderates, today the two parties are more internally consolidated—and further apart from each other—than ever.
Surprisingly, I was able to make it all the way through the article. The author went out of his way to be even-handed in calling out the assumed excesses on the left and right. Trouble is, he didn't succeed. While it shouldn't be surprising that people we choose to associate with will confirm us in our biases, I haven't encountered anyone on the right who has voiced an opinion we should abolish the Constitution or suspend it.
ReplyDeleteThe vehemently held opinion I encounter is, hold the #$%@! leftists accountable and subject to the law based on the Constitution, because if official law enforcement and the Courts won't do the job, it will eventually get done by the people, i.e., vigilantism. About that piece of parchment we're accused of worshipping...
We should be free speech absolutists -- the only exceptions being in the traditionally verboten category of yelling "fire" in a crowded theater unless there's actually a fire. We should be 2nd Amendment absolutists -- the National Firearms Act of 1934, the National Firearms Act of 1938 (rarely mentioned), the Gun Control Act of 1968, the Firearm Owners Protection Act of 1986, the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993, the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (colloquially known as the assault weapons ban), and all the BATF regulatory abuses are ALL unconstitutional, regardless of what the Courts have ruled. I'd even take it a step further: people convicted of a felony, upon completion of their sentences, should have all their rights as U.S. citizens restored. If you find that last statement "concerning", what you're acknowledging is what we've "secretly" known (felt?) for years: if you truly believe that the felon hasn't been rehabilitated and is therefore a threat to the community, then why is he being released?
Apologies for the tangent. Bottom line: as a nation, irreconcilable differences is the order of the day. What the author fails to appreciate is, all the right wants is to be left alone, to enjoy the benefits and responsibilities of true freedom. The left won't leave us alone, thereby ensuring a bloody and violent outcome. Problem is, they're more practiced when it comes to totalitarianism and oppression :-(.
--Bob T.
Gooood comment.
DeleteThe only question I have is about felons. When you say 'completion of their sentence, do you mean their complete sentence, parole included?
In my younger and wilder days I knew a lot of ex-cons that were paroled early because of overcrowding or state mandates or whatever, and I know of only one that actually turned his life completely around and completed his parole without returning to prison for parole violations.
I would say "including parole". Whatever the legal wording would be for paying one's debt to society in full. That's notionally what I meant.
Delete--Bob T.
Thanks!
DeleteBob T., I completely agree with your comment, including restoration of rights for felons; but I'd wager we diverge on sentencing. I firmly believe that felons shouldn't be allowed to come off paper till they have demonstrated that they have a solid grasp of their rehabilitation. Yes, this means open ended, possibly never ending parole, but my only other sensible alternative is serving full sentences with no opportunity for parole. I flip flop on my support for one over the other regularly depending on who makes a good case for one or the other, but generally it comes down to seeing parole as an opportunity to demonstrate reformation vs an fair understanding of the rates of recidivism in the felon community.
DeleteOn the whole however, if one is too dangerous to have rights restored, one is too sangerous to be allowed into society.
Fairplayjeepguy
Whatever we do, we must not let the constitution get up for amendment or rewriting, no constitutional conventions, none of that, because THAT is where the evil power brokers will be at their strongest and all WILL be lost. No! Get the original back and KEEP it.
DeleteTo all you working stiffs out there, you can have your employer stop withholding taxes from your income, I figure, if all t MAGAS, out there did thst, the government would have a serious problem.....hurt them in the wallet!
DeleteBob T voices much of the same sentiment yours truly has regarding the accountability to the Constitution, and the irritations caused by elites' avoidance of those principles.
DeleteI cannot figure those fuckers at Reason out and I've tried. Are they perpetually disturbed by the Constitutional demands of free choice, adherence to law, and allegiance to production and citizens within the borders of the US? Those Reason-ers push "Free Trade without regard to consequences" - it is right and just according to the Libertarian Bible, for slave labor to manufacture items using stolen technology and sell them to wine moms in the US. Because, why, just LOOK at the price of these cyoot shoooz!
Someone with a modicum of common sense please explain why it is NOT appropriate to further an America First agenda. Please. And continue to explain how it is damaging to US citizens to do so. I'm looking at YOU Reason-ers. The patriotic view of self-sufficiency and independence is lost in the academic and think-tank halls; those same halls alive with a firm belief in world citizenship and the death of federalism.
Not only Unconstitutional, but of no value.
DeleteNot a single one of those "acts" has put a dent in violent crime.
It's only gotten worse.
Maybe that has to do with limitations put on the law-abiding instead of criminals?
CC
It's late in the day, but I gotta chime in to answer the question above about free trade & libertarianism.
DeleteWhy should we have absolute free trade? Because it ALWAYS results in a higher standard of living for everyone involved. How could it be otherwise when all the trades are voluntary for both parties? The fact that some of the goods are produced with slave labor doesn't enter in to it, the higher standard of living thing (for both parties who voluntarily buy and sell) holds true.
Why shouldn't we have free trade? Well, it boils down to morals and defense. The slavery thing, the Chinese harvesting organs from political prisoners, buying and selling slaves (called "human trafficking" these days) are examples of the moral problems with completely free trade. The Chinese continually buying dollars (which they then simply warehouse) with yen to artificially move manufacturing to China is the prime example of the defense reasons NOT to have completely free trade.
Now consider that China has had "most favored nation" trade status, which means the lowest possible tariffs, for almost a century now. So obviously those reasons aren't what's moving the elite.
Notice that "America First" doesn't enter in to it. We're all better off and get better goods (in theory) without it. The difficulty comes in where the elite (whatever other labels you want to apply to them) want us all poor and enslaved, or better yet dead. The policies that have historically made "Made in America" a good buying decision are the direct result of their campaign to do exactly that. It's not economics, it's enemy action, it's economic warfare by our own "rulers" against us.
THAT is the real reason why buying "Made in USA" makes any damn sense at all. The shitty "Made in China" products are a deliberate and knowing part of those plans to enslave and kill us all off. If the elite hadn't been selling us out as hard as they can get away with for the last century and a half, the average American would be making $350K/yr. And THAT estimate was only regarding the hidden compliance costs of federal regulation. Not State regulation. Not inflation. Not pork spending misdirecting investment. So it's *way* low.
What would your standard of living be if you made $350K/yr? That's how much I hate the feds, in all their alphabet soup agencies. But perhaps especially the IRS, Federal Reserve, and the DOE. Because yes, making your kids into stupid communists has been a deliberate and KNOWING part of public education from it's inception. Go read John Taylor Gatto's books for details. Which is why calls for more money for education piss me off so much. The problem isn't that the system doesn't work, it's that it works exactly as designed, and throwing more money at it will only make it better fulfill it's design goals.
OK, got a bit of the rails there, but it still stands.
I'm not seeing it. Yes, the left is going gang busters for a fascists new world order, something along the lines of the world economic forum. Most Republican lawmakers are not right wing conservatives, but Democratic light (20 years ago would have be left leaning, but definitions changed). The "right wing extremists" are more than likely constitutionalists that are the antithesis of authoritarian. But l, if you're Reason magazine, you have to paint a difference between Libertarians and constitutionalists and paint the constitutionalost as evil.
ReplyDeleteCan't argue with that comment. I've maintained for several years now that Republicans and Democrats are simply two sides of the same corrupt coin. By that reasoning, I *almost* would prefer a Democrat to a Democrat-lite: the former is consistent is his views and can be relied upon to behave in a certain way, while the latter is inconsistent in his views and unpredictable. To quote an old aphorism, a good politician is one who will stay bought :-). I'm not quite *that* cynical, but money *does* play too large a role in what our nominal representatives do.
DeleteJust yesterday I was the whole day with an 83-year old woman on a day trip into Oregon for her medical needs. All she knows is what she learns on MSNBC, but even she has to bring her theta state up short to give her tv the hairy eyeball. She realizes they're feeding her bullshit, and she listens avidly when I tell her about all the things I know that are NOT part of The Narrative. It seems to me our only real hope is that those us impervious to hypnotism are responsible for both supporting each other and for helping the Democrats we know see sense through their mental fogs. We need to use kindness and not anger to get through to them that this stuff is not in fact anything like the liberalism in their hearts.
ReplyDeleteIf that is too slow, I want to give all the energy I have left to everyone defending our constitution to our last breaths. --nines
The so-called right is not really on the right. Cocaine Mitch, and his capital hill cronies, are not of the right but strongly of the left. The Uniparty is good with authoritarianism. The actual right is very very small.
ReplyDeleteWhatever happened to people loving freedom in this country?
ReplyDeleteJFM
Oh, well, we're still free to do as they say.... --nines
Delete