Skip to main content

View Diary: Beware of Tyrants in Sheep's Clothing (215 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You're Obfuscating (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Calamity Jean, Noddy

    I get what you're saying, but since the Constitution DOES recognize that and we, "the people" recognize the Constitution, we are assured our rights by its existence.

    •  I don't think so (0+ / 0-)

      The Constitution doesn't have the force of a physical law or law of nature. It can, and often is IMO, be ignored, often egregiously.

      Were the Japanese interned in WW II - many citizens and native born - "assured [their] rights by its existence"? Even the Supreme Court ruled against them in Korematsu, and many of the same justices who voted for rights in Brown v. Board held that Fred Korematsu had no right to be free.

      The Constitution, before the 14th Amendment, allowed slavery. How was it changed? I'd argue by the consent of the governed, acting through their representatives, but I'm obfuscating, so you tell me your version. I'd argue it goes back to Jefferson's phrase "as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness".

      What is this magical thing the supersedes the consent of the governed and grants and enforces rights? Even a dictator needs the consent of the governed - he just gets via torture in backrooms or at the point of a gun.

      In Soviet Russia, you rob bank. In America, bank robs you.

      by badger on Mon Jan 21, 2013 at 01:37:14 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  And somehow it ended (0+ / 0-)

        Without the Japanese Americans rising up with guns and putting down the tyrannical government.

        •  No, and if you're going back to (0+ / 0-)

          the original diary's point and premise, I agree with you on that (and thought you put it very nicely, too).

          But the fact remains that the consent of the governed is what holds us together and determines what rights we possess realistically. That's all I've been saying in this subthread, because someone asked.

          Modern revolutions have succeeded because of solidarity, not force.

          by badger on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 02:27:05 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Understood (0+ / 0-)

            I get your point. I just get tired of the whole "the people" kind of argument the way the right uses it. They act as though they are the people. I don't know who they think the left are. Something other than people in some way? I don't know. But yes, the consent of the people is a given in a democracy. The domination of the people is a tyranny.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site