It occurs to me that a part of embracing
liberty as the prime directive of the United States is knowing/accepting what is not an infringement on liberty. The lack of agreement on what is not an infringement might be one of the key issues in the United States. For example, I believe that tolerating other's speech that I don't agree with or tolerating a women's choice to have an abortion is not an infringement of my liberty. Furthermore, I don't have the right to infringe upon another's liberty in doing these things. I say this while acknowledging that "promoting the general welfare" of a nation requires laws that infringe upon liberty as doing anything and everything that I want. Justice is about the give and take between individual liberty and the general welfare of a nation, and this is why we have laws in the United States.
#Current politics in the U.S. turns every tragic event in to a debate about why it happened for the purpose of placing blame upon one's opponent. The facts about what happen don't really matter it is all fodder for the trolling. I think it is what happens when the practice of politics becomes only about trolling, which is performative for emotional responses and not for progress.
#If you believe that capitalism depends upon a free market that depends upon democracy to exist, then it seems to me that
the U.S. Executive successfully threatening a U.S. corporation that results in that corporation meeting the Executive's demands is clear evidence the U.S. is now
an illiberal democracy. Corporations are the prime entities of capitalism that has wealth as it's prime directive, not liberty, so
they are not going to stand up to the Executive. And here is the kicker... given that most American's retirement savings is tied to capitalism via corporate stock, it can be argued their actions are in the best interests of the citizens. The affect is trading liberty for wealth and security.
#Of course, what we are seeing are the consequences of capitalism within an illiberal country. All you need is the Executive to threaten the corporation and the company's greed will cause them to comply with the Executive's orders. All of this is made possible by a non-elected, appointed by the Executive, Supreme Court (see conflict of interest?) implementing tyranny under the banner of "
unitary executive theory" reinforced by a proclamation of being above the law. We got here because the Supreme Court decisions for the last twenty years have not been through
the lens of liberty but through the lens of fundamentalism, both
secular and
Christian.
#Looks like soon there will not be any Late Night television. I don't understand how anyone can square a professed love of the first amendment and the government threatening citizens and companies with retaliation for speech.
#