Junior Ganymede
We endeavor to give satisfaction

The Rule of Law, Long Time Dead

February 11th, 2017 by Man SL

We have reached a point where it is heads they win, tails we lose.

The game has been rigged to make reforming the system within the rules an impossibility. When a majority of the people favor a policy that the managerial class opposes, the policy gets hamstrung by the rules of the game. All of a sudden, the process is sacred. When the managerial class wants something for their masters, they change the rules so it either flies through or simply happens without anyone noticing. The process is not all that important.

All the blather about America being a nation of laws is just cover for the fact that ours is a lawless nation ruled by lawless men. An obvious example is the Ninth Circuit judges, who have fabricated a legal justification for throwing sand in the gears of a wildly popular executive order issued by President Trump. These are not men enforcing the law or respecting the laws. These are men who hold the law in contempt. All that matters to them is obedience to the weird secular cult we have come to call Progressivism.

-thus the Z-Man

When the US discriminated against non-Jewish immigrants in the early nineties, the courts let it be because immigration is strictly the purview of the executive.

When the Clinton administration targeted Cubans for deportation, i.e. Elian Gonzalez, the courts let it be because immigration is strictly the purview of the executive.

When Arizona tried to enforce immigration laws that the Obama administration wouldn’t, the courts ruled that Arizona had to stand down because immigration is strictly the purview of the executive.

Now that Trump is trying to institute a temporary immigration ban on selected countries, the courts are suddenly making up reasons why immigration is not the purview of the executive.

-thus the Audacious Epigone

Comments (5)
Filed under: Deseret Review | No Tag
No Tag
February 11th, 2017 20:24:54

Bruce Charlton
February 12, 2017

What I take from this is that people are not, never have been, and should not be, ruled by ‘law’ when law is regarded as separate from morality.

Law only works when it flows from some moral basis, and when that moral basis comes from a coherent world view. Otherwise laws are arbitrary, contingent, temporary, endlessly negotiable and de facto mere expediencies or rhetorical tools.

Anything else than law-from-coherent morality is just ’emotivism’ – with laws being merely reflections and manipulations of emotions – expressions of hooray and booh.

Western nations *as they are* are unreformable because there is no basis for reform, because there is no basis from which – even in principle – any kind of agreement could be reached about what is good (half the population or more don’t believe even in the possibility of good – as distinguishable from their own emotions).

Those who hope for sensible reforms for the general good are going to be disappointed – and insofar as they get what they want the benefits (eg in economic terms – increased prosperity, efficiency, capability) will be used mostly to build-up and extend the reach of the forces of evil – as has been happening for many decades.

February 12, 2017

Bruce is this something like what your trying to say? Why should men love the Church? Why should they love her laws?
She tells them of Life and Death, and of all that they would forget.
She is tender where they would be hard, and hard where they like to be soft.
She tells them of Evil and Sin, and other unpleasant facts.
They constantly try to escape
From the darkness outside and within
By dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good.
But the man that is will shadow
The man that pretends to be.

T.S. Eliot

Bruce Charlton
February 13, 2017

I agree with what you said, but I was trying to say something different – something more on the lines of the thesis of After Virtue by Alasdair MacIntyre

(but without his conclusion that only Thomism can provide an answer).



John Mansfield
February 13, 2017

I used to like the idea of Washington gridlock, figuring that a government that can’t do much can’t do much harm. I didn’t appreciate the way this would develop into a Congress that can’t do much, freeing the executive branch to act independently. Congress seems to be keeping itself on the sidelines for the Trump presidency as well, letting courts take its place as the deliberative, law-making portion of the government.

February 13, 2017

That is an interesting observation, JM.

What I’d conclude is that any arrangement for stymieing the will to power cannot last forever. Ours seems to have grown increasingly rickety.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.