May 24, 2005
The Correct Words
Where is the European Union going to, as a matter of political structure? Not a dictatorship; maybe an oligarchy.
But I think there is an even more fitting definition: Tyranny Of The Law.
In this model of state, a huge corpus of laws and regulations will leave almost nothing, even private life, unregulated. The preposterously long EU Constitution is a prime example of it. The State, a collective entity with the face of thousands bureaucrats will define and legislate everything. What is dangerous (and thus admissible) and what is not; what can be called marriage, which ideologies are legitimate and which not.
Ultimately, this is system will end up in erasing the distinctions between ethics and morality on one side and law on the other: good and legal will be synonyms. And the Judges will be the priests and sciamans, the only ones initiated to the Word of Law, the ones who can interpretate it and dispense wisdom to the ignorant commons. The idea of individual rights will be meaningless and substituted by a system of immunities and privileges - more often than not given on the basis of class appartenance. Collectivism, after all.
That's a really horrible world to live in.
Ok, maybe I'm painting a too bleak picture, but I see many disquieting signs. The pervasive idea that there are no absolute rights, or its complementary that everything is a right. And rights are collective, not individual. The idea that the Judiciary should more or less dominate over the Executive and Legislative. The systematic attempts to destroy traditional morality and ethics in favour of a vacuous relativism.
The time to stand up and say NO is now.
But I think there is an even more fitting definition: Tyranny Of The Law.
In this model of state, a huge corpus of laws and regulations will leave almost nothing, even private life, unregulated. The preposterously long EU Constitution is a prime example of it. The State, a collective entity with the face of thousands bureaucrats will define and legislate everything. What is dangerous (and thus admissible) and what is not; what can be called marriage, which ideologies are legitimate and which not.
Ultimately, this is system will end up in erasing the distinctions between ethics and morality on one side and law on the other: good and legal will be synonyms. And the Judges will be the priests and sciamans, the only ones initiated to the Word of Law, the ones who can interpretate it and dispense wisdom to the ignorant commons. The idea of individual rights will be meaningless and substituted by a system of immunities and privileges - more often than not given on the basis of class appartenance. Collectivism, after all.
That's a really horrible world to live in.
Ok, maybe I'm painting a too bleak picture, but I see many disquieting signs. The pervasive idea that there are no absolute rights, or its complementary that everything is a right. And rights are collective, not individual. The idea that the Judiciary should more or less dominate over the Executive and Legislative. The systematic attempts to destroy traditional morality and ethics in favour of a vacuous relativism.
The time to stand up and say NO is now.
Comments:
Post a Comment
