|
Edited on Thu Sep-30-10 01:59 PM by WCGreen
This is a quote from the wonderful PBS series simply called The Supreme Court. It traces the history of the court and explores how it has changed over the centuries. It is a wonderful look at the good the bad and the very ugly.
I am just watching part four, “The Rehnquist Revolution."
In this episode, the subject is about the complete turnaround from the Warren Court of leaning toward the individual to the current philosophy of the court that places the state above the individual.
For some reason, there seems to be, in this country, a misguided view of what constitutes liberalism and what constitutes conservatism. From the rhetoric on the streets, the Tea Baggers for instance, they want to get the evil government off their backs but they have consistently sided with republican administrations who have nominated Federal Court Judges who prescribe to Strict Constructivism.
This idea, this strict adherence to the letter of the law is a conservative tenant. The disconnect here is on display by the idea put forth by Rehnquist that the law is to order and since order many times needs the power of the state to be upheld then the rights of the individual would be sacrificed for the higher good which is, in the conservative mind, order.
There is no fairness, there is right or wrong, there is order.
So many of our freedom seekers on the right truly believe that with order comes freedom. That freedom that they so desire, if won on the conservative track, means that order is establish and defined by the state and not the individual. Individuals can and will be sacrificed for the greater good.
This may explain why conservatives are much quicker at the draw when it comes to exercising military might. The sacrifice of life in the pursuit of order is a justifiable use of power.
Liberals, on the other hand, have been portrayed as being fixated with big government as the final answer to any question. Yet, it is liberals who stand up for the individual’s right to bring his case to the courts expecting the courts to side on the individual’s right to be unorderly as long as it is within the confines of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
To a liberal, liberty means being able to speak out on an issue without suffering any governmental control. The order, in the eyes of liberals, is for the individual to challenge since often times order comes at the price of infringed upon liberty.
We have all seen the outcome especially recently and most notably in Gore vs. Bush. Order was threatened by the unclear outcome of the Florida election, most notably by conservative thugs in Florida threatening the orderly counting of ballots by election workers put into an extraordinary situation.
It was because of that threat to order; I believe, that conservatives choose to hand the election over to the republican even though the democrat won by a substantial margin. This abnegated the rights of those who voted for Gore to salvage order.
That is the most current action.
However, Rehnquist came up with the idea that a defendant should only get so many bites at the legal apple, preferably in the state judicial system. If the outcome remained the same, it was not up to the federal government to protect the rights of the individual if order was threatened.
From that Gore decision came the Patriot Act and the continued march toward a government that clearly views order as much more important than the rights of the individual.
Back to the progress referred to at the beginning. It is clear to me that progress is viewed by the conservatives as a challenge to order. Now that, to me at least, says that individual rights are suddenly put on the sacrificial pier whenever control is the “desired” result.
Think about. Slavery was about order. Controlling Abortion is about order. Limiting the rights of the accused is about order. And the conservatives are willing to sacrifice everything as long as order is maintained or restored.
How is it that we have given that ground to the conservatives?
So, what is this really all about?
To me it means that Liberals should start talking more about the rights of the individual, that this country is exceptional because it values and protects the rights of the individual to be an individual. Freedom is more than owning a gun. It is also about respecting the rights of others to disagree with you.
Liberals are about freedom. But since freedom in the abstract is a glorious ideal, we must be willing to sacrifice a little order in order to protect the freedoms we have.
I suggest anyone who hasn’t seen this show to but it from PBS or take it out from your public library or try to catch it on line. It was one of the best programs I have seen on PBS in years. It does not side with any political philosophy but just presents that facts and the outcomes.
Edit to put the quotes around the title...
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
