Principles November 18, 2012Posted by Sobek in News.
A coupla days after the election, Andy put up two polls over at Ace’s asking (hypothetically) which plank in the conservative platform we should drop to get more electoral votes, and which plank would be a deal-breaker if it were dropped. I didn’t vote in either poll (because voting is for suckers), but I have some thoughts on the issue to which I’m going to subject you, via a rambling essay.
The options are these: Abortion, Climate Change, Gun Control, Illegal Immigration, Taxes and Spending and Voter ID. My response is “None of the Above,” and I think it’s important to explain why, beyond simply saying “I don’t want to concede even an inch to those filthy communist hippies.” The options fall into two main groups, with one outlier: freedom issues, process issues, and abortion.
Between 2000 and 2008, the Left discovered and proclaimed (and misquoted) Benjamin Franklin’s dictum that those who would sacrifice liberty for the sake of security deserve neither liberty nor security. They never meant that, of course. If they meant it, they would be as outraged as I am over TSA abuses, or the intrusions of ObamaCare. What they really meant was they hated Bush, but that doesn’t sound like a position of principle, so they had to lie and say it was about freedom.
All of society is a balancing test between liberty and security. I heard a liberal judge speaking at a panel discussion arguing that you can’t give up liberty for the sake of security, but if I had gone to her courthouse I would have been subjected to a metal detector and pat-down. So the question isn’t whether we want liberty or security, but how much of the former we are willing to give up for how much of the latter. If my government can draft me to serve in the military, my freedom is reduced by some degree; but the presence of that military makes my security from foreign threat more solid. DUI checkpoints clearly constitute a warrantless seizure of my person, however temporary, but they also make it less likely that I’ll be killed by a drunk driver. We can disagree on whether we’ve sacrificed too much liberty in either of those cases, but the point is that American society has currently made a determination about where the needle should point between two extremes.
Gun control, taxes and spending and climate change are all issues where the Left wants to take my freedom, and in no event do they seek to replace it with security. Oh, they may argue that seizing guns increases security, but that’s a flat-out lie and they know it. There isn’t a Lefty in the country who thinks criminalizing marijuana means you can’t get marijuana. Why would it be any different for guns? Can anyone argue with a straight face that Chicago’s gun laws mean there are no guns in Chicago? Climate change and taxes/spending are the same thing, because the government isn’t interested in climate change except as a mechanism for taxing activities deemed harmful to the environment. In both cases, my security is not increased, but my liberty to enjoy or dispose of my property is severely curtailed.
I have already given up too much of my liberty to a rapacious, all-intrusive government. The line is drawn in the sand. Want to take more of my rights? Molon Labe.
Every one of these is non-negotiable, because they are liberal dreams for demographic time-bombs set to destroy the GOP. Illegal immigration has absolutely nothing to do with immigration, or human rights, or racism. Liberals don’t care about any of those things. They care that Hispanic immigrants vote Democrat. Voter ID has absolutely nothing to do with ballot access or discrimination. Liberals don’t care about those. They care that voter fraud overwhelmingly favors Democrats.
That any conservative could even begin to consider abandoning either of these issues is insane. Republicans cannot win future elections by importing twelve million new Democrat voters (just to begin with!), or by letting illegal or dead voters have more access to ballots.
This issue isn’t about freedom, per se. At least, it has nothing to do with the sliding scale of liberty and security. And under no circumstances can my personal liberty be infringed by the abortion issue in any event. And it has nothing to do with process, except obliquely and in a contradictory fashion. By that I mean that liberals are far more likely to abort their children than conservatives, so speaking in the most mercenary manner possible, unrestricted abortion should only favor the GOP.
But this issue is about morality, about the soul and worthiness of America. I could no longer compromise on an issue of such stark moral import as I could on a proposed genocide (as indeed abortion seems to be). To the extent that Americans tolerate, subsidize, and eventually celebrate abortion, none of the other issues listed above make any difference, because we do not deserve the liberty we have so long enjoyed. Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey are stains of the blackest sort on our nation’s history, akin to our treatment of the Native Americans or Slavery.
I suffer no end of horror at the thought that some Americans fight with all their energy to perpetuate such a vile and abominable institution, and I can only hope that one day names like Margaret Sanger and Nancy Keenan are detested as much as Heinrich Himmler and Slobodan Milosevic. No, I will not yield this point under any circumstances, not to my dying day, if I should be so unlucky as to have to predecease our great national shame.