« Murder in Berlin. Did the Russian FSB do it? by J. | Main | Biden's medical history »

11 October 2020


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


blue peacock:

I too wonder how long it will be before everyone is working for Amazon.com.

In regards to the US Supreme Court, I read that Wendell Holmes could argue a case, based on one of the 3 prevalent legal traditions of his day, and come to 3 different conclusions.

But he was a what in Arabic is called صالح - Righteous - either born that way or shaped by his experience during the War Between the States.

In my opinion, nothing can substitute for Righteousness; no amount of institutional checks-and-balances, formulaic laws & procedures etc.

If you do not have Righteous men to whom you can entrust tasks, you do not have a prayer.

Mark K Logan


Could pragmatic also describe that thought? I could substitute that word for righteous in your post and fully agree. Holmes was a noted pragmatist. Doomed without that too, we are.


Mark K Logan

I think the two words designate two different qualities.

One could argue, with some amount reasonableness, that Tokyo Rose was being pragmatic for what she was doing; trying to survive.

On the other hand, one could equally argue, with some level of uncertainty, that she was being Righteous to the Emperor.

I speculate that Wendell Homes was trying to cause No Harm first and foremost - taking a moral position in service of which he was exercising a pragmatic (flexible) approach.

Mark K Logan


Indeed. Without morality and common sense both are perilous.

Wendell Holmes lived through interesting times and then served on a court haunted by Judge Taney's Dred Scott decision, which did much to bring those times into being. Taney's decision was both righteous (private property is private property) and pragmatic (the status quo preserved).

A well-laid road to hell.


Mark K Logan

We should remember that Lincoln was preparing to remove Taney from the bench by force when Taney died.


Blue Peacock: The 2018 majority House of Representative under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi takes credit for all funding proposals - or turned off afterburners according to your description. Read the US Constitution to see how powers are granted, and powers are separated.

You err if you assume only the Executive Branch runs a imperial form of government in the United States. You do a disservice if you label any actions of the US Government as only the "Trump administration". Even the presidential power of the veto can be over-turned by Congress, as well as the power to impeach any sitting President by Congress.

Uneasy is the head that wears the nominal "crown" in the United States. Stop cheapening our form of government, identifying it with only one person.

That is a current media cop-out and is a disservice to this exceptional form of governance - power to the elected representatives of the people; subject to constitutional definitions of the politically neutral US Supreme Court. (See Marbury vs Madison)

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad