Even the Buchanan, the Duke of Neocons, won't be able to get the King George robots, those who support the man regardless of what he actually says, to change their mind.
The degree of loyalty that G. Gordon Liddy expressed is more like that of a soldier and not that of a thinking citizen of a republic devoted to personal liberty. "My President right or wrong" is not too far away from "But I was just following orders". The world finally agreed, through the Nuremberg trials, that unquestioningly following orders is no excuse for doing the wrong thing.
As a country, which would we rather have people do, blindly following the a leader who shares our principles or blindly follow principles which are shared by our leaders? It may seem like the same thing but the key difference is how we handle leaders who diverge from our principles. If you attach your loyalties to the man, what do you do when they do something with which you do not agree? You can call him on it or you can defend him and defer coming to terms with his transgression. A free society needs citizens who hold their leaders accountable, not make excuses for their bad behavior or poor choices.
A person who blindly follows their leader has abdicated their decision making, as if to say they don't have to think because all they've determined that their demagogue of choice can do no wrong and any questioning of authority is redundant at the least or a personal affront beyond that.
I could go on but wanted to get this general thought out there. The question to be addressed is this, why do some people stop questioning the actions or decisions of their leaders?
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
We might be seeing the beginning of the citizenry holding our leaders to account. The GOP has recently lost three special elections that were supposedly seats safe for the Republican. The Republican Party today feels like the Democratic Party of the late 1970's - tired and out of gas.
Post a Comment