I saw Miguel’s post on Winnie Mandela and it reminded me of something that I thought I would touch on.
Years ago, Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg did an interview on TV. During which, she talked about South Africa’s drafting of a new constitution.
She recommended that South Africa not follow in the footsteps of the US Constitution but instead follow the guidelines of the UN.
So fast forwarding from 1993, what we are seeing is a genocide (yes, really) of white farmers and land owners in South Africa.
White farmers are being attacked, raped, and murdered while the goverment does nothing to protect them. The level of violence they are experiencing is horrible.
The South African government has voted to take the land from white farmers, some who have been there for generations, and give it to black African farmers. (I guess they didn’t need that pesky 4th Amendment after all)
The situation was so bad that the Australian goverment was going to give emergency visas to white South African farmers as refugees, but after protests by South Africa and Lefty Australians, that was halted.
Apparently social justice means that because someone’s great grandfather escaped persecution in Europe and started a farm in Africa more than a century ago, it’s perfectly justified for a gang of native Africans to rape your wife and daughters to death.
Our Constitution was set up to protect minority rights. Hence our status as a representative republic with Constitutionally protected civil rights.
South Africa’s Constitution was not.
The result is mass killings and property seizures in the name of redistributive social justice.
If there was ever a lesson in the 21st century as to why we should not whittle away at our Constitution, it is South Africa.
Jack booted government thugs are not killing people, they are just turning a social justice eye to the mob violence that is. The government isn’t engaged in any “illegal” land grabs because it legalized the redistribution of land BEFORE is kicked the rightful owners off.
Without our Constitution intact, we are no better off than South Africa.
A bunch of countries have no constitution at all. A bunch of others have something called a constitution, but it doesn’t limit government power.
The important thing we have here, which may be unique in the world (certainly close to unique) is a Constitution which in theory limits government power to specific enumerated powers. While that is not much of a restraint in practice, it occasionally helps a little, on those rare occasions when the courts remember their sworn duty.
It’s interesting to remember that, in the Constitutional Convention, Alexander Hamilton proposed a constitution of unlimited powers, similar to what other countries now have. Fortunately, his proposal was ignored, and he later successfully rebranded himself as the co-author of the Federalist Papers. Whether his marketing stories in those articles about how the Constitution would actually work were misguided or deliberately misleading is unclear to me.
Sometimes I like to reflect on how much the left absolutely HATES our constitution, and specifically our second amendment. At this point, at least some of them are probably beginning to realize that it won’t be possible to impose their brand of creeping tyranny on an armed populace. They are trying to outlaw guns entirely, but it’s just not going to work. The ones that think outlawing or banning an item are going to be struck hard by reality when the 400-600 million guns that are out there don’t suddenly vanish.
The Second Amendment is means towards Separation of Powers. We don’t allow the state to have a monopoly on arms, which makes tyranny all that harder to take root.
And they disarmed them first