The latest assault on the Constitution
You may have noticed the liberal world’s recent bizarre campaign to denigrate the U.S. Constitution. According to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Adam Liptak of the New York Times, and others, the Constitution is no good any more because other countries are not using it as their model as much as they once did, mainly because it doesn’t guarantee enough “rights,” such as the “right” to housing, food, and medical care. In other words, the Constitution is no good because it doesn’t outright mandate an omnicompetent central government attending to every possible human need. So what’s new about that? The left has always disliked the Constitution for that reason. They’ve always been hostile to the Constitution’s restraints on government power, because, being leftists, they want a government of unlimited power. They’ve just found a new way to make the same argument, by saying that the Constitution is not as influential internationally as it once was.
Seriously, has any American who respected and revered the U.S. Constitution ever done so because other countries imitated it? To the contrary, we Americans have always been aware that countries that imitated the Constitution only imitated its form, usually with disastrous results, because those countries lacked the political, ethnocultural, and moral basis for such a Constitution. But the left seeks to make us feel bad about the Constitution because various fourth rate countries are no longer ostensibly following our lead.
However, as Paul Nachman brings to our attention, the leftist schtick is running into some resistance on the part of New York Times readers commenting on Liptak’s article (Paul says to see the semi-obscure “Read All Comments” link a little way down on the left).
StrayGoosePaul Nachman adds:
Maybe there’s some life in the old republic, after all.
Posted by Lawrence Auster at February 08, 2012 10:31 AM | Send