As Paul at PowerLine wrote:
...instead of good naturedly going along with the exercise, or suffering in silence, a number of leftists publicly displayed their lack of comfort with, if not contempt for, the Constitution. Thus, the public received its clearest indication to date that the left regards the words of the Constitution as an impediment to its agenda.The left, under the Bush administration, actually took the opposite tack. They were always complaining that the Republican administration was violating the Constitution.
Of course, hypocrisy is nothing new in politics. But the philosophies of pragmatism and post-modernism both provide increased support to "saying what works" and not worrying about consistency or truth.
Under the system proposed in Plato's Republic, at least the rulers knew they were lying. They had to justify it as noble lying. But under some modern philosophies, there's no such thing as lying, because there's no such thing as unyielding truth.
American popular culture has long held a special place in its heart for our Constitution. It's not viewed simply as a legal document. It is revered as a sacred gift from inspired (though fallible) founders. This is a peculiarly American attitude. In terms of the postmodern left, we "fetishize" the document.
This special reverence for the Constitution was a major feature of the Tea Party phenomenon, and now it has leaked into the Republican Party.
Time magazine chirps in with an article on "the Cult of the Constitution" by Alex Altman, which includes this complaint:
But the notion that our governing document should never evolve has always struck me as mildly insane.I suppose "evolve" is the key word. The document itself includes a process for amending the document. This process has been used. We're up to 27 amendments. We even have one amendment that specifically cancels out a previous amendment. But this isn't the kind of evolving he has in mind. He has in mind evolving understanding of what was already written. He has in mind reinterpretation.
Reinterpretation is the "fetish" of the post-modernists.
Every text
is seen as vexed -
in need of being re-read
until the meaning is dead.
It's their core trick,
and it makes me sick.
2 comments:
I think they're scared that if the public actually reads the Constitution, it will:
1. Clarify certain facts and principles, which are wholly contrary to leftist values and programs.
2. Remind and reinforce the public on the traditional American values of individual liberty.
In other words, the facts and reason are dangerous to leftist ideas!
It reminds me, slightly, of the reformation, when people started reading the bible for themselves, and were struck by the way the text seemed to vary severely from some of the priestly interpretations they had been taught.
Post a Comment