.jpg)
I've been known to go off the deep end on political philosophy, with a particular emphasis on the origins of Conservative Philosophy, and I have received only lukewarm reception to it. But I found another site that engages in those efforts as much as I do and I thoroughly enjoyed it.
The name of the site is The Existentialist Cowboy...and you can read it here....
I'll have to admit that I haven't paid a lot of attention to John Stewert Mill, but I found his relevancy to be very high in our current political climate.
The "cowboy" surmizes:
Mill understood that the democratic ideal -a government of the people - is.
often not the case in fact. Those exerting the power of the government -elected
officials, bureaucrats, the judiciary - develop their own interests, influenced
by special interests and their constituencies in ways at odds with the interests
and liberties of individuals, minorities, or, indeed, the greater good of the
society as a whole. Indeed, a majority may become tyrannical when its interests
are at odds with the legitimate interests of a minority or an individual. Mill
sees no difference between a tyranny of one and a tyranny of many. A
majority running roughshod over the rights of individuals and minorities is no
less a tyrant because it is a majority, because it is elected, or because it is
elected by a majority
So how does that apply to our current political situation?
Well, consider this:
Under the guise of protecting us, the Bush Administration has taken to itself powers unheard of by any other administration in our history. Although Bush was arguably elected "legitimately" in 2000 and then again in 2004, by a "majority" (except it wasn't a majority in 2000) the "majority" cannot take away rights guaranteed by the constitution. Of course they (the majority) could legitimately AMEND the Constitution but I suspect that upon proposing that the "majority" would quickly disappear. But, as they say, here we are.....
Illegal wiretapping has been taking place even beyond the draconian and constitutionally questionable provisions of the Patriot Act.
Persons suspected of being terrorists are detained (not only on the battlefield but also on US soil) and detained without charge;without trial indefinitely.
Dissent is stiffled from the Bully Pulpit of the Presidency.
Congress is bullied and threatened by the President for the legitimate exercise of both their oversite power and exercise of the "power of the purse".
To underscore how tragic this has become, take a look at this from Glenn Greenwald's column today:
Two of the three leading Republican candidates for President either
embrace or are open to embracing the idea that the President can imprison
Americans without any review, based solely on the unchecked decree of the
President. And, of course, that is nothing new, since the current Republican
President not only believes he has that power but has exercised it against U.S.
citizens and legal residents in the U.S. -- including those arrested not on the
"battlefield," but on American soil.
What kind of American isn't just instinctively repulsed by the
notion that the President has the power to imprison Americans with no charges?
And what does it say about the current state of our political culture that one
of the two political parties has all but adopted as a plank in its platform a
view of presidential powers and the federal government that is -- literally --
the exact opposite of what this country is?
So the Cowboy's premise is right. The Bush Administration is illegitimate as hell......from a philosophical standpoint, from a legal standpoint, and from a moral standpoint.
I've thought all the talk about impeachment to be "crazy talk"...... now......well, I'm not sure how "crazy" it is.
