Big Laws and Small Laws

You must log in with your username and password for access to articles that are marked .

If you subscribe to the print edition, you may register here to get a Username and Password.

If you subscribe to the print edition, and would like to access articles that are marked , you may register here to receive a Username and Password.

Not a Subscriber? Click here to try 3 Issues FREE!

G.K. Chesterton observed that when you reject the Big Laws, you don’t get freedom and you don’t even get anarchy.  You get the small laws.

This phenomenon is on display in the growing conflict between the Left’s zeal for crushing free speech and the Right Wing Noise Machine’s tendency toward Bringin’ the Crazy.  So, for instance, the problem with stories like this is that you always have to keep in mind that one of the permanent itches of the Left’s Nanny State ideology is the constant desire to crush free speech and control public discourse.  Just look at the Tyranny of Nice in Soviet Canuckistan, which lacks our Bill of Rights.  The Left, of which Media Matters is a flagship organization, *loves* to point to loonies on the right and urge us, again and again, toward the thought, “Maybe we need to start regulating speech.”  That’s the goal.

At the same time, guys like Glenn Beck make their job way easier because they really are irresponsible with their endless hysterics and comparisons of everything with a pulse to Hitler.  Beck is sort of like those beer ads with gobs of jiggling bodacious flesh, young men and women whooping it up to their hearts content with endless vistas of flowing ale from the manufacturers of Duff Beer—followed by the super-rapid sotto voce disclaimer, “Don’tdrinkanddrivedrinkresponsibly.”  As though Homer Simpson is going to carefully shush everybody at Moe’s Tavern in the middle of the party and say, “Wait! Wait!  Guys!  It says to drink responsibly!”  Beck spends his show feeding hysteria about obscure crap that, as ever, is going to doom us all.  To nobody’s great surprise, somebody out at the end of the psychological bell curve then acts on that crap with his own hysterical response (in this case, attempted mass murder).  Is Beck directly responsible?  Of course not!  No more than Duff Beer is responsible for drunk driving accidents.

And yet, who are we kidding if we completely exonerate Beck thereby?  Is “incitement” a word without any real world referent?  If so, then I guess we Catholics had better stop complaining about Hollywood types who continually urge their audiences to hate the Church.  Hypatia was a mere piece of entertainment, as was the Da Vinci Code.  If people get the wrong ideas from such things, that’s totally their responsibility and no guilt accrues to the makers of these fine pieces of cinema.

My point is not “Let the State regulate speech!”.  It is rather, that rights (like freedom of speech) always entail responsibilities.  A civilization (like ours) that treats freedom of speech as a license for irresponsible rodeo clowns to incite murderous nuts or irresponsible clowns like Andrew Breitbart to slime people without apology is a civilization that is about to destroy yet another of its liberties.  The only people who can stave that off are us, but we have to be a responsible self-policing people (like, for instance, the Anchoress) because if we won’t do it, Nanny Staters will be happy to use our refusal of responsibility to take over the job.  If we refuse to obey the big laws of responsibility, we shall surely get the small ones of speech regulation.  It’s how the universe works, under God.

Filed under big laws and small laws

That’s pretty much the same thoughts I had when healthcare reform was passed.  Because we failed to provide healthcare to those who needed it via private means the government was able to step in.  And they may step even further.

May step in farther?  That was the whole point of the bill: in a few years, it will be obvious to “all” (the politicians, that is) that the govt is the only one we can trust for health care, and viola! state sponsored murder.

So…. The commies don’t want to drain my fluids then?

“At the same time, guys like Glenn Beck make their job way easier because they really are irresponsible with their endless hysterics and comparisons of everything with a pulse to Hitler. “

If you have to exaggerate to the point of outright lying to make your point, you really don’t have much of a point. I don’t see Beck often. But when I do, I always come away thinking how he is actually quite measured and bookish; and how criticism such as the above is more or less a fabrication.  When the entire left wing media establishment takes responsibility for the recent murder of eight white people by a black man obsessed with racism (wonder where he got the idea), we can take commentary like this seriously. Actually, we couldn’t even then.

My feeling is that you can’t respond to an extreme from the middle.  You will be sucked over to that extreme.  You have to hope, pray, and responsibly respond from the other extreme.

It seems like one should apply what seems to be the point of this article (responsibility in public discourse) to the following line: “At the same time, guys like Glenn Beck make their job way easier because they really are irresponsible with their endless hysterics and comparisons of everything with a pulse to Hitler. ... Beck spends his show feeding hysteria about obscure crap that, as ever, is going to doom us all.” I’m glad Mr. Shea is realizing the power and importance of words and the care we should employ in using them. Perhaps he will be more selective, precise, and accurate in the future and not give in to gross exaggeration.

criticism such as the above is more or less a fabrication

You can’t be serious.

Yes, yes.  I know the people compiling the clips of Beck’s hysterical ravings are ritually impure.  Still and all, that is Beck up there doing the hysterical raving and comparing everybody with a pulse to Hitler.

When the entire left wing media establishment takes responsibility for the recent murder of eight white people by a black man obsessed with racism (wonder where he got the idea), we can take commentary like this seriously.

I pretty much agree with Morgan Freeman that we would all be better served if the Left stopped obsessing over race.  But, as is obvious, the Left has no intention of doing so, just as it has no intention of desiring free speech.  Those of us who say we favor free speech and ordered liberties should stop cutting slack to irresponsible demagogues instead of whining “They’re the problem, not our tribe.”  It’s called “being a responsible citizen”.

I have to agree with Kurt and Dan.  Every time I have watched Beck, I am struck by his passion and love for our country. He makes some very good arguments.  Mark dismisses him as if he is some kind of kook with no real message and that is totally uncalled for.  Does Beck get carried away sometimes?  Yes, but that is his personality.  You may not like his ways but if you listen to what he is saying, he tells it like it is.  Do I agree with everything Beck says?  No, but that doesn’t mean I dismiss him as “irresponsible” and as someone ” feeding hysteria about obscure crap”.  Shame on you, Mark!

“that is Beck up there doing the hysterical raving and comparing everybody with a pulse to Hitler” 

The “hysterical raving” is simply your overblown (perhaps hysterical?) characterization. The Hitler thing is just plain factually incorrect.  He has made numerous dead-on connections between today’s “progressives” and the vile, totalitarian origins of their movement.  That’s what makes his critics squirm and rant.  Can you argue with any of that?  The Hitler thing?  Not so much.  Can you provide an itemization of Beck Hitler comparisons, along with context?  If not, Pot meet Kettle.

When faced with the extreme radical character of this administration, this congress, and the modern American Left in general, moderation and passiveness is no virtue. 

Media Matters can make fools of themselves and call for censorship all they want.  The best counter strategy is to keep them busy documenting all the cases of people engaging in heresy of the statist religion; not to tone it down in a feeble attempt to pacify them.  To say that Media Matters is intellectually stunted and dishonest is to put it mildly.  They breathlessly report every known instance of people expressing independent thoughts.  They are a joke and everybody on their radar should take pride in the fact.

Mark, regarding your link to the Tyranny of the Nice. Actually, Canada has a Charter of Rights, which in many ways is similar to the USA’s Bill of Rights. However, it only applies to interactions between the government and the citizenry. Hence, Mr. Steyn’s “persecutors” had to use the ridiculous “Human Rights Tribunals” which are quasi judicial bodies whose abolition/restriction was recently recommended. They are truly bizarre bodies whose usefulness has been outlived and which are a scourge on the Canadian landscape and are definitely used by people to try and restrict free speech - which routinely fail . FYI, I would not use Mark Steyn’s writings as an apt, nor definitive, description of Canada nor of Canadians. His viewpoint definitely leans towards the utilitarian bent, and he would find many papal teachings, from Pius’s writings on modernism to Benedict’s Caritas in Veritate to border on communism.

Mark,

This is the second post I’ve read of yours about Beck.  You seem a bir obsessed with him, yet athe same time don’t understand him at all.  I also think you are dead wrong.  But I, like you, am entitled to my own opinion.  Keep up the good work!

Mr. Shea: Your response to “Kurt” proves that my hope that you would take your own advice was misplaced. That’s too bad.