Posted by Brad @ 10:15 pm on January 22nd 2013

Seneca Falls, Selma, Stonewall

My only errant point about the inaugural address.

Its best section, in which those three civil rights events were called out, was great.

After a few days’ reflection, I feel this is worth pointing out:

Two of the three events he mentioned specifically surrounded people rising up and retaliating against government authorities – who were acting on codified and enforced communitarian and paternalistic principles.

Three of the three involved citizenry, not government agents, taking it upon themselves to rectify wrongs.

Don’t mistake that for some sort of right wing nut point. But it is a point.

A very fair question, I think, is: who are the groups of people the government is actively trying to literally and figuratively beat down today?


  1. Boy, Obama has gotten REALLY self-congratulatory on the gay rights thing, and is getting a complete pass for it from progressives. I think that a bit more humility would be called for, given the pace of his “evolution” on the issue and the recency of his epiphany on marriage.

    Your point, in any case, is well-taken. Government is the agent of enforced consensus, and we’d be unwise to look to it for moral guidance considering that it tends to be last to the table on issues of inclusion.

    Gays–even now–remain the targets of overt persecution by many government authorities. I would place Muslims high on the described list, and I think I’m prepared to identify nonhuman animals as a persecuted class in moral terms, even while recognizing that they don’t possess the full spectrum of rights pertaining to humans.

    Comment by Rojas — 1/23/2013 @ 1:10 pm

  2. I would perhaps throw in illegal immigrants, ex-felons, and marijuana smokers, although there is kind of a difference in kind there.

    Coming soon: “mentally disturbed” teenagers?

    Comment by Brad — 1/23/2013 @ 3:48 pm

  3. I guess I was under the impression that you wanted a list of categories where people are targeted based on their intrinsic nature (ala blacks, gays) as opposed to targeting for violation of specific laws. There is an interesting case to be made that certain jurisdictions target teenagers, especially teenage boys, as a category.

    Comment by Rojas — 1/23/2013 @ 7:58 pm

  4. It was kind of a rhetorical question, but yes, that’s what I mean by difference of kind.

    Comment by Brad — 1/23/2013 @ 8:03 pm

  5. Brad, illegal immigrants, ex-felons, and marijuana smokers don’t count until they have a site that alliterates with Seneca Falls, Selma, and Stonewall. Coachella is close but not close enough.

    Comment by FreedomDemocrat — 1/25/2013 @ 12:24 am

  6. Also, Shawshank would fit in well with the list, but it’s a SH not a S.

    Comment by FreedomDemocrat — 1/25/2013 @ 12:25 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Leave a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.