|Classy: Tribe Accuses Recently Deceased of "Sheer Perversity"|
When they lack the Maoist or Stalinist power to imprison and kill their opponents, following Gramsci, Dutschke and Marcuse, the Left takes over academic and cultural institutions, guileless groups that had been given preferential status as trustees of non-partisan cultural common goods, then replaces the functions for which they were established and excludes all alternative perspectives systematically. The leftists have accomplished much with their "long march through the institutions," notably corrupting the state- and federal- civil services, universities, seminaries, artistic and professional associations, endowments and foundations, perverting associations for the common good into endowments of sectarian political activism. We've had quite a few good examples of this recently. Only a true leftist like Obama would declare NASA's highest goal to be "Muslim outreach" and subordinate the manifest needs of soldiers to the will of feminist sexual levelers. We've seen the corruption of the IRS civil service into a partisan tool. We've witnessed the continuing self-immolation of the academy. Even the appearance of the White House itself is just a canvas upon which Obama projects his partisanship, with his pro-homosexual light show.
Like the other crumbling pillars of our society, to the American Left, the U.S. judiciary is just another tool in their fight to destroy traditional forms of social life: church, marriage, family, property and liberty. Naturalism, license, libido, socialism and bureaucracy must take their place. Believing only in eternal Promethean Revolution, in the infinite self-transformative potential of man, the idea that the judiciary should apply the laws that have been laid down in the past rather than continuing to unmake even human nature itself through revolutionary change is unthinkable.
The Justices who led what Scalia called the "judicial putsch" over same-sex marriage openly averred that their overthrow of the role of sex and children in marriage was not an interpretation of the constitution as it has been but the imposition of a newer better constitutional vision, drawn from the mystical sight, will and striving of the coven of leftist judges who forced it upon us.
Laurence Tribe, Harvard Law professor and mentor of radicals, openly admits the attitude of the left toward law in this article. After attacking Scalia's "sheer perversity" in trying to read laws in terms of what they say and mean historically, he urges the leftists readers of the New York Review of Books, which Tom Wolfe described as the "chief theoretical organ of radical chic":
... to drop the pretense that we have nothing in mind but what we deem the theoretically proper judicial methods, come what may, and simultaneously to resist the unfounded claim [of the right] that only those who applaud right-leaning outcomes while proclaiming strict adherence to text and history can truly claim the mantle of constitutionalists who believe in the rule of law.
That mantle instead belongs to those who are most candid about the non-existence of any ironclad “method” that should, or even can, obviate the necessity for human choices about the demands of justice and the meaning of America.Constitutional rule of law is established, for the left, by those who eschew method and embrace choice, i.e. will. The rule of law means the rule of those who reject "right-leaning outcomes" and want "left-leaning outcomes." The reason that Tribe rejects method in law is that any attempt to understand our constitution and law according to what our founders and lawmakers have done would be far to the right of what the left demands. Law is inherently anti-revolutionary in that it looks back to what has been done, rather than to the goal of the future utopia. Tribe wants the will of the Left to rule, not law.