Skip to main content

The irony of constitutional freedom

Freedom of expression, freedom of the press, freedom to peacefully congregate to express opinions and so on and so forth are some of the most fundamental core values of a modern free society, most often, in most countries, expressed in the most fundamental guiding document of the government, ie. the so-called "constitution".

The constitution is an attempt to guide and limit the government in order to protect individual rights, freedoms and equality, and stop the government from trampling over and infringing its citizens' fundamental rights.

There's a great irony in this, however. You see, dissemination of anti-constitutional ideologies, ie. ideologies that seek to limit or even annul the country's constitution itself, is, quite ironically, protected by the constitution. (It would indeed be quite contradictory and even hypocritical for a constitution to say, essentially, "all speech is protected, except anti-constitutional speech.")

These basic freedoms allow, for example, muslim extremists in the west to rally their people against constitutional freedoms. They allow social justice warriors to indoctrinate people into thinking that things like freedom of speech and freedom of congregation should be limited. In other words, they are using the very freedoms that the constitution grants them to speak against those freedoms.

And what worries me is that those ideologies are highly "infectious" and "virulent". More and more people are being indoctrinated into them. Especially social justice warriors are appropriating schools and universities, where most of the future leaders, judges, congresspeople and the press are studying, and are indoctrinating them into believing a totalitarian anti-constitutional racist ideology. And more and more people are converted every day.

It's like the constitution is working against itself. It protects the freedom for people to work against the constitution.

It makes me think of how the Nazi part rose to power in Germany in the 1920's and 1930's. They were, after all, a political party elected to the parliament using the regular democratic process.

This attack against the constitution, however, is happening at an even more fundamental level.

Comments