This is such an interesting point, and I’d like to see you dive into *why* the discussion of history in this way keeps cropping up. Lately, I’m sure that it’s partly anti-Trumpists trying to find some sort of ground truth from which they can be objectively right.
But the Federalist Society, Supreme Court Originalists, and Second-Amendment advocates all push this historical emphasis to justify their positions. 5-4 POD and others have been very good about pointing out how these appeals to historical intent are usually just head-fakes that distract while they simply wield power as they see fit. By the time the critics have gone back to the sources and checked their references, the damage is already done and they’ve moved on to a new atrocity.
So how common is it, in the history of this very young country, to appeal to the wisdom of the ancients (Founders)? How and why? The amount of cherry-picking from the record for any liberal or conservative trying to base their argument in the foundations of the Republic must be so tortured!
Is it that our country is juuuuuuust so old, and our common historical knowledge juuust so poor that people can appeal to history and get away with it? Or was it always thus?
Well, after Nixon attempted autocracy I wrote a book in 1983 intended to appeal to high-school students about the history of republics, with “republican” defined as favoring a form of state NOT ruled by ONE person. Such states fall to Caesars and Napoleons when people forget that principle--as we have. My word processer here keeps insisting, like the majority of today’s voters that there is no such word as “republican”--only “Republican”. The cause has been lost.
The End of Kings appealed to me, too, though I wasn't a high school student but a middle and high school teacher (I'm citing it, yet again, in my forthcoming book). I continue to doubt that republics become dictatorships because people forget a principle--or, more to the point, what I doubt is the converse proposition that when democratic republics thrive, it's because the majority of people are remembering a principle. And to the point of my post, I suspect that if the cause really is lost, the loss can't be traced to, say, the failure of radical Republicans' plans for Reconstruction.
I have to admit that a democratic electorate does not respond readily 100% to arguments about principle. And of course (case in point) abortion is not an abstract principle. Thanks for quoting EofK in your new book. I’ll read it directly and flog it like a pro.
The uncritical acceptance of Supreme Court Precedents that are patently fascist has brought us to the present intersection of fascism and Climate Chaos. Specifically I refer to the toxic Precedent thread of '76 Valeo, '78 Bank of Boston, '10 Citizens United, '17 McDonnell. This thread effected the staged inversion of political bribery from impeachable offense to de facto campaign necessity - as employed by >95% of all successful Federal campaigns.
Mussolini observed that "fascism is the merger of State and corporate power" The present American fascism differs from the traditional in that the unparalleled bribery gives primacy to corporate interests. Dictatorship is the common mode of Fascism and I suggest that Trump, DeSantis share the common goal dictatorial control (Trump's instincts give him a distinct advantage - clearly).
Instinctively we expect the Democratic Party to be the loyal opposition. It is not. Nowhere is this more clear than in the Climate Crisis. Obama 'bragged' (correctly) that US fossil fuel production increased every year he was in office. This holds true for Biden as well. And 95% of our new production is by the crime of fracking - making sacrifice zones endemic across the US.
At present both Partys work to maximize corporate profits of their biggest contributors in every economic sector. In the energy sector, humanity has the misfortune that the fracking vampires who are sucking our death out of the Earth have vastly greater disposable income than the solar and wind industries.
How do we survive? I find no other source of hope than the schema sketched below:
Mussolini definitely appealed to a historical precedent to justify his actions! I wonder if there’s a constituency of any country that would be more likely to go along as long as you grounded your POV in a portrayal of historicity.
As I've had reason to mention to you before, this is the kind of ad hominem I remark I discourage in these comments. That was fair warning.
This is such an interesting point, and I’d like to see you dive into *why* the discussion of history in this way keeps cropping up. Lately, I’m sure that it’s partly anti-Trumpists trying to find some sort of ground truth from which they can be objectively right.
But the Federalist Society, Supreme Court Originalists, and Second-Amendment advocates all push this historical emphasis to justify their positions. 5-4 POD and others have been very good about pointing out how these appeals to historical intent are usually just head-fakes that distract while they simply wield power as they see fit. By the time the critics have gone back to the sources and checked their references, the damage is already done and they’ve moved on to a new atrocity.
So how common is it, in the history of this very young country, to appeal to the wisdom of the ancients (Founders)? How and why? The amount of cherry-picking from the record for any liberal or conservative trying to base their argument in the foundations of the Republic must be so tortured!
Is it that our country is juuuuuuust so old, and our common historical knowledge juuust so poor that people can appeal to history and get away with it? Or was it always thus?
Well, after Nixon attempted autocracy I wrote a book in 1983 intended to appeal to high-school students about the history of republics, with “republican” defined as favoring a form of state NOT ruled by ONE person. Such states fall to Caesars and Napoleons when people forget that principle--as we have. My word processer here keeps insisting, like the majority of today’s voters that there is no such word as “republican”--only “Republican”. The cause has been lost.
The End of Kings appealed to me, too, though I wasn't a high school student but a middle and high school teacher (I'm citing it, yet again, in my forthcoming book). I continue to doubt that republics become dictatorships because people forget a principle--or, more to the point, what I doubt is the converse proposition that when democratic republics thrive, it's because the majority of people are remembering a principle. And to the point of my post, I suspect that if the cause really is lost, the loss can't be traced to, say, the failure of radical Republicans' plans for Reconstruction.
I have to admit that a democratic electorate does not respond readily 100% to arguments about principle. And of course (case in point) abortion is not an abstract principle. Thanks for quoting EofK in your new book. I’ll read it directly and flog it like a pro.
The uncritical acceptance of Supreme Court Precedents that are patently fascist has brought us to the present intersection of fascism and Climate Chaos. Specifically I refer to the toxic Precedent thread of '76 Valeo, '78 Bank of Boston, '10 Citizens United, '17 McDonnell. This thread effected the staged inversion of political bribery from impeachable offense to de facto campaign necessity - as employed by >95% of all successful Federal campaigns.
Mussolini observed that "fascism is the merger of State and corporate power" The present American fascism differs from the traditional in that the unparalleled bribery gives primacy to corporate interests. Dictatorship is the common mode of Fascism and I suggest that Trump, DeSantis share the common goal dictatorial control (Trump's instincts give him a distinct advantage - clearly).
Instinctively we expect the Democratic Party to be the loyal opposition. It is not. Nowhere is this more clear than in the Climate Crisis. Obama 'bragged' (correctly) that US fossil fuel production increased every year he was in office. This holds true for Biden as well. And 95% of our new production is by the crime of fracking - making sacrifice zones endemic across the US.
At present both Partys work to maximize corporate profits of their biggest contributors in every economic sector. In the energy sector, humanity has the misfortune that the fracking vampires who are sucking our death out of the Earth have vastly greater disposable income than the solar and wind industries.
How do we survive? I find no other source of hope than the schema sketched below:
–- Constitutional Reset 2024 ---
Supreme Court Crushing OUR Rights
Take Back the Court - A3S1:
Judges shall serve on good Behaviour
Ergo, shall be fired on bad Behaviour
Revoke False Precedents
-$s are not Speech nor Corps people-
That rot bred present fascism!
The Fix: Public Funding of Elections
$200 Voter Vouchers - Nothing Else!
DC will work for us & our children:
-Tackle Climate Chaos at Scale-
CO2e Tax $400/ton Funding UBI
-Market Forces Drive Solar/Wind
-Initial UBI ~$1,000/month
WWII Level Funding, Taxes, Effort
-42% GDP = 8T$/yr for 5 years
-95% Max TaxRate over 4M$/yr
-Gift Solar to US & Global South
Why? Gotta Save the Whole World
Make Friends, Not War
DC will pass: iM4A, Union Rights,
$25 Min Wage tied to productivity,
Free pre-K through University,...
Mussolini definitely appealed to a historical precedent to justify his actions! I wonder if there’s a constituency of any country that would be more likely to go along as long as you grounded your POV in a portrayal of historicity.