3 ms·

> The source is anti-left; of course they are going to give characterizations like that. But I think leftists would share the same premise! They would phrase i

> The source is anti-left; of course they are going to give characterizations like that. But I think leftists would share the same premise! They would phrase it differently, they’d say something like: “the founders were white men who wanted to limit government power so the government wouldn’t be powerful enough to do things like end slavery or take their property.” But that’s the same argument. The traditional view is a small government of enumerated powers. The post-civil rights view is a powerful federal government that can protect minorities from democracy. > They won't say they are hostile to the Civil Rights Act and every solution to problems like segregation, oppression of minorities and women, etc. And they don't offer any other solution. That doesn’t logically follow. The analogous mistaken argument would be saying that those who insist on due process for deportations must support illegal immigration, because “they don’t offer any other solution.” Of course that argument is wrong. Those people simply aren’t willing to compromise on due process to address illegal immigration. Similarly, you can be unwilling to compromise on federalism and limited government, even if it’s to address oppression of minorities. That doesn’t mean you support such oppression, simply that you prioritize other values more highly.

mmooss 2y ago
> That doesn’t mean you support such oppression, simply that you prioritize other values more highly. Yes it does, in fact. And while people can try to doublespeak and have everyone parsing it out, all that matters is where you end up.
- rayiner 2y ago
  Even if you think that all that matters is “where you end up,” your logic still doesn’t work. Adhering to principles of federalism and limited government also changes other aspects of society, in ways that people might deem desirable.
  - mmooss 2y ago
    A solution that leaves people under cruel, evil oppression for generations tells you everything you need to know about the people supporting it.
oa335 2y ago
> The traditional view is a small government of enumerated powers.. The post-civil rights view is a powerful federal government that can protect minorities from democracy. James Madison, one of the founding fathers of the United States, wrote: > "This view of the subject must particularly recommend a proper federal system ...[or else] oppressive combinations of a majority will be facilitated: the best security, under the republican forms, for the rights of every class of citizens, will be diminished... Justice is the end of government. It is the end of civil society. It ever has been and ever will be pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit." As well as : > "In a society under the forms of which the stronger faction can readily unite and oppress the weaker, anarchy may as truly be said to reign as in a state of nature, where the weaker individual is not secured against the violence of the stronger; and as, in the latter state, even the stronger individuals are prompted, by the uncertainty of their condition, to submit to a government which may protect the weak as well as themselves; so, in the former state, will the more powerful factions or parties be gradually induced, by a like motive, to wish for a government which will protect all parties, the weaker as well as the more powerful." As well as: > "It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. Different interests necessarily exist in different classes of citizens. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure."

mmooss 2y ago

> That doesn’t mean you support such oppression, simply that you prioritize other values more highly. Yes it does, in fact. And while people can try to doublespeak and have everyone parsing it out, all that matters is where you end up.

rayiner 2y ago
Even if you think that all that matters is “where you end up,” your logic still doesn’t work. Adhering to principles of federalism and limited government also changes other aspects of society, in ways that people might deem desirable.
- mmooss 2y ago
  A solution that leaves people under cruel, evil oppression for generations tells you everything you need to know about the people supporting it.

oa335 2y ago

> The traditional view is a small government of enumerated powers.. The post-civil rights view is a powerful federal government that can protect minorities from democracy. James Madison, one of the founding fathers of the United States, wrote: > "This view of the subject must particularly recommend a proper federal system ...[or else] oppressive combinations of a majority will be facilitated: the best security, under the republican forms, for the rights of every class of citizens, will be diminished... Justice is the end of government. It is the end of civil society. It ever has been and ever will be pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit." As well as : > "In a society under the forms of which the stronger faction can readily unite and oppress the weaker, anarchy may as truly be said to reign as in a state of nature, where the weaker individual is not secured against the violence of the stronger; and as, in the latter state, even the stronger individuals are prompted, by the uncertainty of their condition, to submit to a government which may protect the weak as well as themselves; so, in the former state, will the more powerful factions or parties be gradually induced, by a like motive, to wish for a government which will protect all parties, the weaker as well as the more powerful." As well as: > "It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers, but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. Different interests necessarily exist in different classes of citizens. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure."