Government v. ‘the people’
By Frank F. Ellis III
Liberals and conservatives will process this essay differently, and it is interesting that our brains do this.
American liberals want a strong, controlling, central government, while conservatives are trying to preserve the idea of the individual being supreme, and government the servant of the people, rather than the other way around.
Ellis is retired from the furniture industry. He lives in Roanoke.
February 14, 2013 - 8:24 AM
Mr. Ellis says, “American liberals want a strong, controlling, central government, while conservatives are trying to preserve the idea of the individual being supreme, and government the servant of the people, rather than the other way around.”
This isn’t true in regards to liberals. I realize it’s easy to, for both sides of a debate, to misinterpret what your opponent is about but one must at least try to be accurate.
We liberals also value the idea of the individual being supreme but recognize a central government can be used to help preserve those rights.
For example, we want women to have a choice on abortion and want gays to be able to marry their same sex partners. Those are individual choices that conservatives don’t like but liberals look to the government to preserver. When it comes to things like gun control, some conservatives want absolute freedom while liberals think a gun owners right may eventually infringe on the life, liberty, and happiness of the liberal. And on this particular subject, the liberals are mostly right. Please see:
http://mikethemadbiologist.com/2013/02/13/on-gun-control-and-getting-smart/
We all pretty much want the same things, we just disagree about how to achieve it.
I also want to take fault with his statement about the 10th Amendment. While it’s true this gives a great deal of power to the States vs. the Federal, it often comes into conflict with the 9th Amendment which says these aren’t a complete list of the rights afforded citizens. So what do you do when they come into conflict? Liberals often advocate the Federal overrule the States when the States attempt to restrict individual choices.
But apparently they don’t teach about the 9th Amendment in the right wing blogosphere/television/radio/newspapers.
“We liberals also value the idea of the individual being supreme but recognize a central government can be used to help preserve those rights.”
A strong Central govt. takes away rights, it doesnt preserve them. Bush used the fear of terrorism to consolidate his power. The Patriot Act,Real ID etc. Obama has done the same thing, but with economic fear. The more you take from the govt. the more control they have. That is really what Obamacare is about. A population dependant on govt. The media also plays the “fear” game. Right after the election was the sky is falling, “fiscal cliff” then the “oh to be feared” debt ceiling, now its the “dreaded” sequester.Fear is the tool govt. likes best. The media thrives on it as well, gains a lot of viewers and sells a lot of papers. Govt. is not really your “Uncle Sam”.
Blue Tony, I agree it needs to be watched carefully. It has the power to protect and the power to ruin.
But if the liberals are going to be accused of liking the Federal government, it has to be noted we like it when it’s providing a protective role of our rights and not one where the power is being abused.
Well said and spot on Scott M. A good government, being the people we elect, and upholding the laws of our nation and the principles of our Constitution, absolutely ensures our rights and the perpetuity of this nation. No individual does that or can do that.
#2, you state “A strong Central govt. takes away rights” It can, and has, done that in the past, but it also has identified, secured, and protected the rights of individuals in the past and present. I would argue that it has done more of the latter than the former. Liberalism today (speaking as a proud Modern Liberal) seeks to work against the former and perpetuate and promote the latter.
This idea is found in the first words of our great governing document: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America”
The framers of the Constitution then proceeded to establish in that document a Federal Government, the purpose of which is to enact the ideas found in the Preamble.
“A strong Central govt. takes away rights” It can, and has, done that in the past, but it also has identified, secured, and protected the rights of individuals in the past and present. I would argue that it has done more of the latter than the former”
I bet I can cite the opposite. You make a list and I will rebutt. Who has it protected?
#6, what would be the point of such an exercise? I offer a list, you (erroneously) would attempt to discredit it; I would challenge you to offer a list, I would debunk that…I accept you believe the Federal Government denies more rights than it grants or protects. I think you’re wrong, but I understand you think you’re right. So again, what’s the point? You’ll never acknowledge any validity in my stance, and I’ll never acknowledge any in yours. Close the book.
Scott M…it is strange how when reading the Constitution, liberals can interpret plenty…abortion. But have a difficult time understanding the explicit…the right to keep and bear arms.
The 9th amendment states there are other rights not mentioned in the Constitution that are retained by the people.
As a conservative, I want a small efficient government that can protect our borders and US citizens. Currently, we have more people working for the government (citizens) than work in the private sector. And it is so big that no one is responsible…see Bengazi murders. And want to micromanage to the point that it tells me what light bulb I can use.
And what makes your liberal views on abortion and gay marriage right and my views against them wrong?
Liberals like to use the government or courts to enforce their views even when 1/2 the population disagrees. It also likes to use the government to enforce their view when 1 person in a county of 17,000 is offended…see Giles county and the 10 Commandments.
Blue Tony@musician.org, I would suggest you start with the Civil War and move forward from there. The Supreme Court has had to decide that the Constitution protected former slaves, women, children, Black Americans, and even gun owners. Just go down the list.
http://www.civilrights.org/judiciary/supreme-court/key-cases.html
http://billofrightsinstitute.org/resources/educator-resources/landmark-cases/
The ACLU also has an impressive list of forcing the enforcement of American Civil Rights as does CAIR.
http://www.aclu.org/human-rights
http://www.cair.com/civilrights/knowyourrights.aspx
The government has been instrumental in proving rights and enforcing them, for a very long time. And when they have not been, once the case has been made, they will be.
Al, if you bother to read the Second Amendment as it was written instead of just skipping to the end, you see that indeed, it is very explicit and since there was no standing army at that time, it made great sense to have and keep “A well regulated Militia” for the safety and sovereignty of our nation. That militia in lieu of the standing army “being necessary to the security of a free state”, of course the best way to guarantee that militia would be available was to make sure “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”. Yes, very explicit indeed. And now that we have had a standing army, the FBI, CIA, and local law enforcement that is nothing to sneeze at, that “well regulated militia” is no longer “necessary to the security of a free state”, and “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” needs to be looked at seriously in the light of public safety.
Now, as to the Ninth Amendment: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people” Seems tailor made for those rights of supreme privacy like the behavior in our bedroom and reproductive choice.
Add to that the applicable part of the Fourteenth Amendment: “Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws“, and it makes the idea of anyone butting into private matters like abortion, sexual practices between consenting adults and the quaint notion that “equal” means equal and you have the perfect proof that abortion is legal and homosexuality is legal and deserving of equal rights protection.
Let me know if you need any more info. Here to help.
#8 Al, “Liberals like to use the government or courts to enforce their views even when 1/2 the population disagrees.” Congratulations, you have successfully identified one of the most salient functions of the Supreme Court: protecting minorities, even small minorities, from “tyranny by the majority.” Maybe you missed that lesson in civics class.
Oops sorry, instead of “Supreme Court” I was supposed to say “SCOTUS” because that sounds more political-bloggish.
@9
The Supreme court also found slavery “constitutional”.. And you don’t have to go far back at all.The Court also upheld that Police can enter your home without a warrant, just recently. The Patriot Act,Real ID.American Citizens can be kidnapped and taken to foreign countries for torture.The books you read can be investigated,and the librarian cannot even reveal that fact..Books mind you. Under Obamacare, the feds have easy access to your bank account,circumventing previous rules. Drones kill our citizens(which Obama has no problem with) and just today on the CBS morning show it was revealed that drones will soon be patrolling our skies en masse in the next couple years.This IS 1984 come to life. I can name many more and I don’t have to look it up and paste it online. Do you like the fact that photo imaging is already being used to where you can be recognized and identified anywhere in the world.Proposed RFD chips in your DL, you can be located and followed on a whim. No fly lists if you have a foreign sounding name. Once all these things are in place, no one will dare speak up, and that is the goal of Central govt. In addition Obama’s goal is knowing the location and sale of every gun. See a pattern here? Big govt. through incrementalism is taking over our lives. Be wise enough to see that. As I said before they are not really your Uncle Sam, wake up and smell the coffee.