Skip to main content

A Gulag Is A Gulag. The US In General Is Not

 22 years ago in an essay, I said that I preferred Bush 43 to be re-elected president, for lots of policy reasons. But on a personal note, the Democrats acted like our country itself was a gulag, and we were all allegedly locked in it.

Happy warriors usually win; dour people embarrassed for the very country they intend to govern usually don’t. In the interest of principled criticism, I definitely know that “enhanced interrogation” and the abuse of terrorist militants violates longstanding human rights commitments.

In the present day, ICE detentions that ignore judicial orders to obey habeas corpus have a gulag-adjacent quality. Any lawyer advocating for basic human rights can say anything they want. I didn’t vote for Donald Trump; I didn’t appoint Stephen Miller. This is quite apart from illegal immigration, and the probable likelihood that any such people also are violent criminals. In other words, when ICE agents are protecting Americans and guests from monsters along with other law enforcement, they are on firmer ground than when they are deporting a Dad or Grandmother for being in an irregular situation.

That noted Republican Bill Maher (sarcasm) has shown a chart that far fewer illegal immigrants were deported or denied entry to the US under Biden than other recent presidents in both parties. Therefore, I have to concede that “open borders” may be a legitimate criticism there. But as I have said, personally, I don’t care how many Spanish speakers and foreign nationals are around, as long as they don’t make trouble. Even so, fears of non-assimilation and a loss of common culture are not, by themselves, rooted in bigotry and xenophobia.

Right now, Democrats are viewed as being out of touch with the concerns of ordinary citizens, in favor of idiosyncratic and ideological activists. Even if they win the midterms this fall, I don’t see them attaining majority party status for several cycles at least.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Dear Alyse

 Today, you’re 35. Or at least you would be, in this place. You probably know this, but we’re OK. Not great, but OK. We know you wouldn’t want us moping around and weeping all the time. We try not to. Actually, I guess part of the problem is that you didn’t know how much we loved you. And that you didn’t know how to love yourself. I hope you have gotten to Love by now. Not a place, but fills everything in every way. I’m not Him, but he probably said, “Dear daughter/sister, you have been terribly hard on yourself. Rest now, and be at peace.” Anyway, teaching is going well, and I tell the kids all about you. They all say you are pretty. I usually can keep the boys from saying something gross for a few seconds. Mom and I are going to the game tonight. And like 6 more times, before I go back to South Carolina. I have seen Nicky twice, but I myself haven’t seen your younger kids. Bob took pictures of the day we said goodbye, and we did a family picture at the Abbey. I literally almost a...
Post a Comment
Read more
Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...
17 comments
Read more

A Friend I Once Had, And The Dogmatic Principle

 I once had a friend, a dear friend, who helped me with personal care needs in college. Reformed Presbyterian to the core. When I was a Reformed Presbyterian, I visited their church many times. We were close. I still consider his siblings my friends. (And siblings in the Lord.) Nevertheless, when I began to consider the claims of the Catholic Church to be the Church Christ founded, he took me out to breakfast. He implied--but never quite stated--that we would not be brothers, if I sought full communion with the Catholic Church. That came true; a couple years later, I called him on his birthday, as I'd done every year for close to ten of them. He didn't recognize my number, and it was the most strained, awkward phone call I have ever had. We haven't spoken since. We were close enough that I attended the rehearsal dinner for his wedding. His wife's uncle is a Catholic priest. I remember reading a blog post of theirs, that early in their relationship, she told him of the p...
Post a Comment
Read more