Monday, February 22, 2010

Dennis Prager asks Andrew Sullivan how he reconciles his conservatism with his support of court-mandated 'rights' that defy the majority view. Prager cites the case of Massachusetts, where the black robes have advanced gay marriage against the will of the people and even the legislature.

The mind baffles. Isn't, in the conservative schema, the government's single most legitimate function the protection of rights and liberties of individuals, particularly against the prejudicial whims of the majority? You can argue that marriage isn't a right or liberty, but in the abstract I don't understand Prager's confusion with this focal rightist principle. The courts are crucial for this exact purpose: To circumvent or supercede democratic decisions for the sake of furthering liberty and defending rights. When the many, through the coercion of the state, attempt to impose moral and cultural particulars that chafe the freedom of the few, that is popular sovereignty gone bad; that is frightening overreach, the tyranny of the crowd so feared by ancient philosophers.

The current conservative animosity toward the judiciary is proof positive of the movement's corruption by populist anti-establishmentarianism. So many conservatives claim to be "constitutionalists," yet especially during the reign of Bush II, they evinced great distaste for separation of powers and checks and balances. During that period, at least on the national level, they became rabid executivists, cold to the courts and congress unless they advanced the will of the presidency, an office now vested with potentially unlimited, dictatorial powers, if that's what the circumstances demanded.

Now that Obama is in the White House, their caesarism has calmed, but only because the mighty weight of the imperial office is now stacked against them. Funny how they decry Obama as a king for excercising the very powers they rigged into the office from 2000 - 08. Turn about may not be fair play, but it sure is fair irony. Republicans are sort of more on board with republicanism now, but just wait a cycle or two.

No comments:

Post a Comment