Jewish World Review Aug. 12, 1999 /30 Av 5759
http://www.jewishworldreview.com -- LIBERALS HATE DEMOCRACY. While that was never a state secret, it's becoming more and more apparent.
Democracy is here defined as individual autonomy as well as majority rule. Recently, Gray Davis (California's liberal governor) and a phalanx of judicial activists and liberal litigators held a burial service for California's Proposition 187. Next of kin were not invited.
The measure, enacted in 1994 by nearly 60 percent of the vote, prohibited the state from providing public services to illegal immigrants in an effort to control our borders and stop the hemorrhage of government spending on illegals.
The U.S. District Court in Los Angeles decided the measure violated the 14th Amendment or Code of Hammurabi or Roberts Rules of Order, and struck it down.
As a candidate, Davis promised not enforce 187. Now he's decided it's best for everyone to drop the state's appeal. And the will of the 5 million Californians who enacted 187? Screw 'em -- the ignorant, xenophobic bastards -- liberals in effect are saying.
In 1988, Arizonans made English their official language. That was nullfied by the Arizona Supreme Court. The state, which never really wanted it, defended the referendum so ineptly it was clear that the match was being thrown.
Loathing for vox populi, free speech and individual choice are the trademarks of modern liberalism. Dan Quayle submitted a proposal for his book, "Worth Fighting For," to Random House. Its president, Ann Godoff, wrote back that the book would probably be a commercial success.
"The trouble is," Godoff continued, "I just don't want to be a party to the promulgation of ideas I disagree with so profoundly." The trouble is, if every major publisher was as narrow-minded as Godoff (most are), conservative books would rarely make an impact (which is generally the case).
From "I will defend to the death your right to express ideas I abhor," liberalism has devolved to "I don't want to be a party to the promulgation of ideas I disagree with."
Here are a few more examples of liberalism's growing affinity for jackboots and thumscrews.
Speech codes -- Ostensibly to promote sensitivity, liberals in academia censure the expression of ideas they find unacceptable.
Term limitation -- This is another favorite target of liberal litigators. In the name of defending democracy (allowing voters to "choose" a candidate who's been in office since the Pleistocene era), liberals undermine the democratic process. It's the advanatages of long-term incumbency that short-circuit democracy.
School choice -- The ACLU recently went to court to overturn a Florida law, providing private-school vouchers to kids at failing public schools, on the grounds that anything which takes funding from public education is unconstitutional.
Why not admit it, they don't want parents to have any input in their children's education? They want liberal teachers teaching liberal dogma in schools to which families will be forced, by economic necessity, to surrender their children.
Gay rights -- from the liberal social agenda, dissent will not be allowed. Last week, New Jersey's Supreme Court ruled that the Boy Scouts are Motel 6 (a public accomodation) and so must take homosexual scout masters, like it or not. The liberal definition of tolerance trumps voluntary association every time.
Taxes Why are liberals making such a fuss over an $80 billion-a-year tax cut, when federal revenues have increased $375 billion in the last five years alone? Why do liberals only care about the national debt when a tax cut is pending?
Liberals know that money is power -- power over your family, your business, your life. They want that power in their hands, not yours.
American liberalism isn't what it used to be. In the 19th century, liberals championed universal suffrage. The turn-of-the-century Progressive movement pushed for the direct election of senators, initiative and referendum, and recall.
Today, it's: Do this, you can't do that, just shut up and give us your money, your guns and your kids. It's all a reflection of liberalism's crisis of confidence. They no longer believe the people are with them and so can't be trusted to govern themselves.
The democratic left? It went the way of the New Deal and Americans for
Democratic Action. If today's liberals were to confront the '40s
totalitarian movements again, it's hard to say which side they'd be
JWR contributing columnist Don Feder can be reached by clicking here.