MORE THOUGHT ON IMMIGRATION AND CULTURES/RELIGIONS…

MORE THOUGHT ON IMMIGRATION AND CULTURES/RELIGIONS

I don’t think there can be any reasonable objection to requiring anyone who enters a country to renounce violence against that country’s people, institutions, or government, and to renounce the espousal of violence against them. If they feel they can’t or mustn’t do that because of conscience or religion or other beliefs, fine, they just don’t have to be admitted to the country. The Catholic Social Teaching of the last hundred years says migration is a right or sometimes a necessity, but I think that has to be qualified to say peaceable migration (I mean in the strictest sense). So, for example, would Wahabbist imams or teachers from overseas be excluded from Western countries? So I hear. Wahabbist laity? Shiites? Iraqi Sunnis? Taliban? Even certain international students studying in Western countries? Of course, they could lie…if their faith or conscience or beliefs permit them to…. Perhaps even naturalized citizens, since the nature or extent of the potential danger has only come to light relatively recently. Under American law at least, this wouldn’t necessarily be seen as religious discrimination, but selection on the basis of advocating violence against the people, institutions, or government. In practice it might have to be on a case-by-case basis rather than a blanket exclusion. And is there room for abuse? Sure. Let’s work so that there is not. Not because our Constitution recognizes “rights” of foreigners: this is how American law differs from Continental law – it doesn’t pretend to bestow or create rights for people – these come from immemorial tradition or God – rather, it limits government to the powers granted to it by its particular Constitution.

(This is why ISTM in theory America doesn’t need international law to criminalize what’s gone on at Guantanamo or Abu Ghraib or the Black Holes or other “extraordinary rendition”: the Constitution of the United States simply does not empower the government of the United States to torture or do these things – against ANY human being, American or foreign – therefore when it does, it is acting ultra vires, beyond its powers, i.e., it’s unconstitutional. Many governments around the world are traditionally considered to possess all powers to do whatever they feel they need or wish to do, but not American governments. American governments – federal, state, local – can be taken to court, accused of acting beyond their Constitutional or chartered powers, and a court can find so, and enjoin such actions, and assess damages. Of course, would that U.S. government officials and representatives didn’t try to do things they’re not allowed to do in the first place…though in defense of some perhaps, the limits might not always be so clear until courts have ruled in concrete cases. [And as we have seen lately, even our courts can be corrupted.] But what about reason, morality, even our vaunted Christianity?)

(Those native-born of whatever religion, politics, or beliefs, can be criminally charged if and when they’ve broken laws, as always, and sentenced to prison or probation upon conviction. They might even lose certain “privileges” without formal criminal conviction: e.g., I noted when I first got my driver’s license in a certain state years ago, that it said “advocating the violent overthrow of the government” could result in revocation of my driving “privilege”…presumably by an administrative procedure which might not include all the rights or procedures of a criminal trial…since America legally regards driving as a privilege not a right…even if it’s pretty much a requirement the way the country has evolved since WW2!!!)

Advertisements

NO TIME FOR IMPEACHMENT? Like a chamber of 435 so…

NO TIME FOR IMPEACHMENT?

Like a chamber of 435 somewhat competent adult voting members and umpteen committees, with who knows how many aides, can’t do more than one thing at a time!

No time for more than one Congressional act per news day? Screw that! I contributed to newscasts that featured up to five or six acts at a time from a humble city council or county legislature! And sure, didn’t our Congresspeople find time to send us three or four press releases or prerecorded statements a week, usually worth d*ck, pure re-election free publicity?!!!

So DO the 100 Hours, the 100 Days, whatever, AND start the Impeachment process at the same time! History will not forgive us otherwise. And make the DC press corps(e) earn their keep for once!

PRES. FORD DIS(EN?)FRANCHISED US TOO… So says t…

PRES. FORD DIS(EN?)FRANCHISED US TOO…

So says this commentary.

THEY SAY HUSSEIN IS DEAD. May God have mercy on h…

THEY SAY HUSSEIN IS DEAD.

May God have mercy on his soul.

And his victims’.

And ours’.

And theirs.

WILL THE FALL OF SOVIET COMMUNISM BE FOLLOWED SHOR…

WILL THE FALL OF SOVIET COMMUNISM BE FOLLOWED SHORTLY BY…

the fall of American Rationalized Capitalism? We certainly seem to be losing our hemispheric satellites! We’ve even managed to elect a ‘liberal-leaning’ Congress just now, and if we’re lucky, it may begin to dismantle our last harsh, ‘conservative’ regime – not democratically-elected at that. And a recent neocon mag pronounced the death of globalization with a beached ship on its cover!

Of course, that will still leave forms of Rationalized Corporate Rule in Britain (pace Her Majesty), the EU/Brussels, and Australia, maybe like the world still has Communist China, Vietnam, North Korea, and Cuba – ‘liberalizing,’ like “capitalism with a human face.”

(“Rationalized Capitalism” isn’t small-time family shops and farms and crafts and merchant/traders, or even larger Sovereign-dominated limited corporations serving real public needs. It’s the anal-retentive, stingy, hyperactive, “Protestant work ethic,” megasized, hyper-exploitive, wage-slavery, excess profiteering, power-hungry, manipulative, inhumane, uncaring, “invisible hand”-trusting, “law of the jungle” [sic], “rugged individualistic,” world-consuming, Globe-Warming, warmongering, imperialistic, militaristic, fascistic, corporatistic/Big Business, anti-traditional, amoral/immoral, ruthlessly calculating, hyper-“scientific,” “bootstraps,” anti-welfare [pun intended!] kind best represented by early industrialism, robber barons, “neoconservatism”/neoliberalism, deregulation, globalization…and in fiction, Scrooge and the Ferengi. The label “rationalized” normally refers to the hyper-calculating, “scientific,” penny-pinching, profit-maximizing approach…but since sociologist Max Weber saw its rise linked so closely to that of Calvinist Puritan Protestant Christianity in Britain and even more so in America [arguably since Britain has always retained a culturally-dominant Broad Church], the other meaning of “rationalized” is also appropriate: reasoning how what you’re doing is good, moral, virtuous, Biblical, God-ordained, and for the Common Good, when it doesn’t seem so, even seems the opposite of these things.)

ELECTED SENATE BAD FOR CANADIAN DEMOCRACY Unlike …

ELECTED SENATE BAD FOR CANADIAN DEMOCRACY

Unlike America, Canada has an Upper Chamber free of electoral political b.s. to complement its totally-elected and dominant Lower Chamber. How one gets there may grate on (small-R) republicans – the Prime Minister advises the Governor General to summon them by name on behalf of the Queen – but once there, they’re beholden to nobody, have proven themselves so, and provide the “sober second thought” so lacking Below the 49th Parallel. Now Bush-clone Stephen Harper wants Provincial advisory elections for Senatorial appointments, which he knows will become actual elections in all but name, without putting the country through the sturm und drang of amending the constitution again. Combined with his Senatorial term-limits – 8 years instead of serving till age 75 (or earlier voluntary retirement) – and what will be required next will be Chamber equality, so just like Australia, a government will effectively need the confidence of both Houses, and modern Westminster Parliamentary Democracy is out the window.

(Personally I’ve come around to the logic of a largely hereditary Upper Chamber, i.e., the pre-Blair UK House of Lords – lifelong preparation, no electoral political b.s. [complemented by the totally-elected and dominant House of Commons], “sober second thought,” even – on a good day – a slow Red Tory/One Nation brake on modern ideological politics in the Commons. But I don’t see anybody adopting a House of Lords de novo without an actual conquest or something, especially in [small-R] republican America or republican-influenced Canada or Australia…so let’s make do.)

DO-IT-YOURSELF IMPEACHMENT Now available here! S…

DO-IT-YOURSELF IMPEACHMENT

Now available here! Spread the word!!