I've really been trying to avoid posting on the politics. Although, I know some of you read other blog I read and comment on as well. You may have noticed one of my refrains these days is "And the whackaloon quotient goes up." There's a lot going on in the world and in the politics of this country that I disagree with. Not so much from seemly benign intent of individual actions, but the culmination of many actions.
Take for instance the gaining popularity of "Strict Consitutionalism." That we should read the Constitution as the Founders originally intended. Thing is, it doesn't mean what you think it means. Many of those who are proponents are "small government" and "less regulation" types. Thing is, we tried that. It was called the Articles of Confederation. Weak central government, states rights, no taxes, pretty much what the strict Constitutionalists want. Unfortunately it didn't work. Which is why we now have the Constitution. But here's something interesting. There's a part of the Constitution which caused great consternation, Article I, Section 2, paragraph 3. The first sentence of which was the subject of a later Amendment. That sentence, of course, is the one about counting the people, other than Free People, at three fifths a person.
The Amendment that changed that sentence? Why that would be the 14th Amendment. You know, the one those same Strict Constitutionalists want to roll back. In the name of self defense, of course. (And, as an aside here, I also feel the call to repeal "birth right citizenship" is a nod to the birthers. You might remember the whole thing about Obama's birth certificate and that his father was Kenyan. "Louie Gohmert, white courtesy phone, Louie Gohmert, white courtesy phone.")
And many people support that on those concepts because they have no idea what is really going on.
See, many years ago Ronald Reagan gave the first speech after his nomination at the Neshoba County Fair. Which is just down the road from Philadelphia, Mississippi. His speech was about "States' Rights." Sound familiar. Yeah, that's another of the calling cards of the Strict Constitutionalists, states' rights.
Which is also what was cited by the Confederacy States for breaking away from the Union. You might remember that we had a little war over that. Said war redefined the Constitution and how we read it, and also brought about the 14th Amendment (also the 13th, to be fair).
You might want to read that wiki about the Neshoba County Fair speech. Now, I'm not saying that everybody that spouts this stuff believes in the same things. However, most people in public office have a very big interest in history, both making it and knowing the past. Which is why there is the controversy around Reagan's speech. And yes, Reagan knew exactly what he was saying and where he was saying it. You may remember that before Obama, Reagan was considered the president in recent memory who gave the best speeches. Those people in positions of power, current politicians and former (disgraced) politicians who are attempting to stage a comeback, are very well aware of what they are implying and who they're implying it to.
Welcome to the new Southern Strategy.
Now, some can believe in all of the above, Strict Constitutionalism, repealing the 14th Amendment (which has more than just the "birth right citizenship" clause, some of which are pretty interesting and thought provoking), and States' Rights because they honestly believe it will be better for everybody. There are also those who fly the Confederate Battle Flag because of the honor and tradition of the soldiers of the Confederacy. But they are the vast minority and have put blinders on to avoid all the other baggage that flag comes with and what it means today.