WOD. Bellwether: noun: a wether or other male sheep that leads the flock, usually bearing a bell; a person or thing that assumes the leadership or forefront, as of a profession or industry: "Paris is a bellwether of the fashion industry."; person or thing that shows the existence or direction of a trend; index; a person who leads a mob, mutiny, conspiracy, or the like; ringleader. ety: Middle English belle 'bell' + wether 'castrated male sheep'
***
***
There is a book out, Dark Money, about the Koch brothers. It is a strange topic. The Kochs are generally seen as the bankers of the "Radical Right." But they are pro-gay marriage. They favor liberal immigration policies. They are passionate non-interventionists when it comes to foreign policy. They are against the drug war and are spending a bundle on dismantling so-called “mass incarceration” policies. So, how are they the Radical Right? The answer is probably they are outspoken opponents of top-down government-mandated change, a real enemy of the powers-that-be.
Let's call them "Elitist deniers."
***
One popular and recurring concern is the fear that immoral people might get control of the government, might get their evil hands on the levers, and do egocentrically motivated damage to the rest of us. But isn't this a risk inherent to any government? And isn't the solution to limit the potential damage by limiting the government power in the first place, not counting on the random and unpredictable election of a good guy?
***
One popular and recurring concern is the fear that immoral people might get control of the government, might get their evil hands on the levers, and do egocentrically motivated damage to the rest of us. But isn't this a risk inherent to any government? And isn't the solution to limit the potential damage by limiting the government power in the first place, not counting on the random and unpredictable election of a good guy?
***
A shooting at a bar in Penn Hills has left two people dead and seven others injured, police said Sunday.
And, one 27-year-old male was killed and 24 people were wounded by gunfire in an overnight shooting at a birthday party in Akron, Ohio, according to local police. Evidence is consistent with a drive-by shooting, and people at the party may have returned fire.
***
Vigilante Juries
Regardless of one's politics, the Trump case raises at least debatable legal points. (Andrew McCarthy says there are 12 specific reasons for an appeal to overturn the decision.) And nothing in a culture is more dangerous than allowing the courts and the law to become a sword rather than a shield. Or to allow for that perception.
Jury nullification occurs when a jury believes a defendant is guilty but renders a “not guilty” verdict because it regards the relevant law as unjust.
John Adams said about jurors, “It is not only his right, but his duty … to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgment, and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court.”
It has been said that such an attitude prevailed in the pre-Revolution period when English law was thwarted in the colonies because it was felt the individual was guilty of violating the law but that the law was wrong. Conscience is a difficult bellwether when the culture does not have common ground. How would someone advocating jihad vote on a matter of terrorism, for example?
States and cultures are organized on basic precepts. That is, basic assumptions. This unanimity among people's beliefs on the nature of life--or the organization of life, the state--is the state's DNA. Law and the courts are a culture's epicenter.
***
Vigilante Juries
Regardless of one's politics, the Trump case raises at least debatable legal points. (Andrew McCarthy says there are 12 specific reasons for an appeal to overturn the decision.) And nothing in a culture is more dangerous than allowing the courts and the law to become a sword rather than a shield. Or to allow for that perception.
Jury nullification occurs when a jury believes a defendant is guilty but renders a “not guilty” verdict because it regards the relevant law as unjust.
John Adams said about jurors, “It is not only his right, but his duty … to find the verdict according to his own best understanding, judgment, and conscience, though in direct opposition to the direction of the court.”
It has been said that such an attitude prevailed in the pre-Revolution period when English law was thwarted in the colonies because it was felt the individual was guilty of violating the law but that the law was wrong. Conscience is a difficult bellwether when the culture does not have common ground. How would someone advocating jihad vote on a matter of terrorism, for example?
States and cultures are organized on basic precepts. That is, basic assumptions. This unanimity among people's beliefs on the nature of life--or the organization of life, the state--is the state's DNA. Law and the courts are a culture's epicenter.
How much latitude can such a system tolerate?
2 comments:
You can’t get by with All the way with LBJ anymore
You can’t get by with All the way with LBJ anymore
Post a Comment