Comments on: Will the Real Institute on the Constitution Please Stand Up? https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/08/06/will-the-real-institute-on-the-constitution-please-stand-up/ A [retired] college psychology professor's observations about public policy, mental health, sexual identity, and religious issues Wed, 30 May 2018 18:26:31 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1.2 By: James Ferguson https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/08/06/will-the-real-institute-on-the-constitution-please-stand-up/#comment-82137 Wed, 30 May 2018 18:26:31 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=15030#comment-82137 Unbelievable! Obviously, these persons can’t hear themselves speak. Yet, this seems to be the thoughts of the Tea Party and its offshoots these days. I have to figure that guys like Peroutka and Lofton would have been much more comfortable with the Articles of Confederation than they are with the Constitution, which contradicts virtually everything they have to say.

]]> By: JCF https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/08/06/will-the-real-institute-on-the-constitution-please-stand-up/#comment-82138 Wed, 30 May 2018 18:26:31 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=15030#comment-82138 God, I can read that racist sh*t w/o wanting to take a bath. Absolutely disgusting. [ “exert some control over a still primitive black population”: who was “primitive”? The lynch-mobs or their victims?]

]]> By: John Lofton https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/08/06/will-the-real-institute-on-the-constitution-please-stand-up/#comment-57093 Sat, 10 Aug 2013 23:17:33 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=15030#comment-57093 What King’s view on what constitutes a just law proves is that even “one of the most grossly immoral hypocrites in American history” can, on occasion, by God’s grace, be right about something.

]]> By: John Lofton https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/08/06/will-the-real-institute-on-the-constitution-please-stand-up/#comment-83643 Sat, 10 Aug 2013 19:17:33 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=15030#comment-83643 What King’s view on what constitutes a just law proves is that even “one of the most grossly immoral hypocrites in American history” can, on occasion, by God’s grace, be right about something.

]]> By: David M https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/08/06/will-the-real-institute-on-the-constitution-please-stand-up/#comment-57092 Wed, 07 Aug 2013 14:10:00 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=15030#comment-57092 Pat, I think you have misread Richard Wilmer, though I certainly want to let Richard speak for himself. I think Richard is calling into question the right-wing version of theocracy by which the specific commands of God (Thou shalt not…) are immediately translated into human laws.
What you call a left-wing version of theocracy is not theocracy in the normal understanding of that word. It doesn’t take the specific commands of God and make them civil laws. Rather — and I think this is what Richard is getting at — it takes the value of love (as represented by the two commands Jesus says sum up the law) and tries to work out what those might mean in society today. There is no promulgation of the laws to love God and love neighbor as civil laws per se. In short, I think your so-called left wing version of theocracy is a rhetorical device to obfuscate the sharp differences between living by biblical laws and living by biblical values (which are also widely held human values). Clever, but illogical.

]]> By: David M https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/08/06/will-the-real-institute-on-the-constitution-please-stand-up/#comment-57091 Wed, 07 Aug 2013 13:52:59 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=15030#comment-57091 In 2010, Bruce Loebs published a fascinating study entitled “Hitler’s Rhetorical Theory.” It’s fairly easy to find online. Two of the principles of Hitler’s rhetoric might be of some help here in understanding the contradictions apparent in IOTC and LoS materials.
First, “Propaganda, propaganda, all that matters is propaganda” (Mein Kampf [Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1943]). Hitler wrote, “The function of propaganda is not to weigh and ponder the rights of different people, but exclusively to emphasize the one right you have set out to argue for… Propaganda’s task is to serve our own right, always and unflinchingly” (MK 182). I presume then, if one can twist the words of an enemy like MLK Jr to say what you want to say, so much the better.
Second, tell a big lie, not a small one. “In the size of the lie there is a certain factor of credibility, because, with the primitive simplicity of their feelings the masses fall victim more easily to a big lie than to a small one… And
even with the explanation of the matter the masses long hesitate and vacilate and accept some ground as true. Consequently, from the most bold lie something will remain” (MK 231-2). So perhaps the idea that this new Confederacy will be welcoming to blacks and other races is a big lie, intended to make the idea of the Confederacy more palatable to the emotions of the masses (for which Hitler had contempt). Using a misappropriated quote here and there from MLK would only reinforce this big lie.
From what I’ve seen here, I cannot say for sure that IOTC and LoS are following Hitler’s rhetorical playbook. Perhaps though, knowing Hitler’s theory gives us a paradigm by which we might understand the split-tongued nature of their communications.

]]> By: Warren https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/08/06/will-the-real-institute-on-the-constitution-please-stand-up/#comment-57090 Wed, 07 Aug 2013 12:29:37 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=15030#comment-57090 In reply to Patrocles.

Pat – Someday when I understand what you are talking about, I may be able to answer your questions.

]]> By: Patrocles https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/08/06/will-the-real-institute-on-the-constitution-please-stand-up/#comment-57089 Wed, 07 Aug 2013 12:04:50 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=15030#comment-57089 Perhaps, if you don’t accept MLK as an authority, you shouldn’t accept his doctrine about God’s law. I don’t know, and it doesn’t follow, from a logical point of view.
But certainly, if you accept MLK as an authority, you should accept his doctrine about God’s law, too. And do you?
(Richard Willmer doesn’t, but he is one of the more thoughtful persons here.)
The problem you try to avoid is the problem that there are two variants of theocracy, a rightwing and a leftwing. And you won’t see that because you won’t have to decide between a leftwing theocracy and no theocracy at all.

]]> By: David M https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/08/06/will-the-real-institute-on-the-constitution-please-stand-up/#comment-83639 Wed, 07 Aug 2013 10:10:00 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=15030#comment-83639 Pat, I think you have misread Richard Wilmer, though I certainly want to let Richard speak for himself. I think Richard is calling into question the right-wing version of theocracy by which the specific commands of God (Thou shalt not…) are immediately translated into human laws.
What you call a left-wing version of theocracy is not theocracy in the normal understanding of that word. It doesn’t take the specific commands of God and make them civil laws. Rather — and I think this is what Richard is getting at — it takes the value of love (as represented by the two commands Jesus says sum up the law) and tries to work out what those might mean in society today. There is no promulgation of the laws to love God and love neighbor as civil laws per se. In short, I think your so-called left wing version of theocracy is a rhetorical device to obfuscate the sharp differences between living by biblical laws and living by biblical values (which are also widely held human values). Clever, but illogical.

]]> By: David M https://wthrockmorton.com/2013/08/06/will-the-real-institute-on-the-constitution-please-stand-up/#comment-82818 Wed, 07 Aug 2013 09:52:59 +0000 https://www.wthrockmorton.com/?p=15030#comment-82818 In 2010, Bruce Loebs published a fascinating study entitled “Hitler’s Rhetorical Theory.” It’s fairly easy to find online. Two of the principles of Hitler’s rhetoric might be of some help here in understanding the contradictions apparent in IOTC and LoS materials.
First, “Propaganda, propaganda, all that matters is propaganda” (Mein Kampf [Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1943]). Hitler wrote, “The function of propaganda is not to weigh and ponder the rights of different people, but exclusively to emphasize the one right you have set out to argue for… Propaganda’s task is to serve our own right, always and unflinchingly” (MK 182). I presume then, if one can twist the words of an enemy like MLK Jr to say what you want to say, so much the better.
Second, tell a big lie, not a small one. “In the size of the lie there is a certain factor of credibility, because, with the primitive simplicity of their feelings the masses fall victim more easily to a big lie than to a small one… And
even with the explanation of the matter the masses long hesitate and vacilate and accept some ground as true. Consequently, from the most bold lie something will remain” (MK 231-2). So perhaps the idea that this new Confederacy will be welcoming to blacks and other races is a big lie, intended to make the idea of the Confederacy more palatable to the emotions of the masses (for which Hitler had contempt). Using a misappropriated quote here and there from MLK would only reinforce this big lie.
From what I’ve seen here, I cannot say for sure that IOTC and LoS are following Hitler’s rhetorical playbook. Perhaps though, knowing Hitler’s theory gives us a paradigm by which we might understand the split-tongued nature of their communications.

]]>