Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
When I first heard the proposal of a “truth and reconciliation” process in the United States, I felt my hair stand on end. Robert Reich, formerly of the Clinton Administration, proposed this kind of commission be established, and I knew that he was up to no good. I actually felt outraged when he used the term because I knew that these commissions were established internationally to deal with the outcomes of devastating upheavals in 40 countries. I am very familiar with events in Rwanda:
Few have been brave enough to flesh out what the Ahmarist, or “anti-Frenchist,” vision of the common good should be. Some have said articulating specifics is beside the point, that Ahmarists’ refreshing achievement is unapologetically asserting a common good exists, even if they decline to say what, exactly, it is. And then, there are guys like Adrian Vermeule, writing in The Atlantic, brave enough, at least, to flesh out a vision of sorts. Vermeule calls it “common-good constitutionalism”, which he describes as “an illiberal legalism that is not ‘conservative’ at all, insofar as standard conservatism is content to play defensively within the procedural rules of the liberal order.” When Vermeule writes,
[U]nlike legal liberalism, common-good constitutionalism does not suffer from a horror of political domination and hierarchy, because it sees that law is parental, [emphasis added] a wise teacher and an inculcator of good habits. Just authority in rulers can be exercised for the good of subjects, if necessary even against the subjects’ own perceptions of what is best for them—perceptions that may change over time anyway, as the law teaches, habituates, and re-forms them. Subjects will come to thank the ruler whose legal strictures, possibly experienced at first as coercive, encourage subjects to form more authentic desires…
So here you are at your conviction. Yes, for this hypothetical you’ve committed a crime you dastardly individual, you. Anyways, you’re clearly guilty, the verdict is passed, and then the judge lays down sentence. “You have a choice,” he declares, “five years in prison or twenty lashes.” Wait, what? Preview Open
Donald Trump has not seduced me. I loathe him. After a decade of seeing the GOP play the long-game and building from the ground-up in state legislatures, governorships, the House and finally the Senate, watching a clown and his fans burn it all down at the finish line is beyond tragic. I have been #NeverTrump since […]
I was incensed watching the Broncos-Colts football game Sunday. I love the Broncos (along with a few other teams), but this attempt by a Bronco player to gouge the right eye out of an opposing player made me jump up and scream “Throw this S.O.B. out of the league!” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41GOEVwk37w Preview Open