judicial tyranny

[Wojtek Sokolowski]

At 07:48 PM 5/16/01 -0400, Nathan wrote:
>
>Much as I disagree with the laws around the drug war, I agree with Justin
>that it would be a completely constitutional position to have the Supreme
>Court carve out a states rights position on the issue.  The rightwing is
>pushing forward to carve up such rules to strike down federal
>antidiscrimination legislation; for progressives to push in the same
>direction of states rights is absolutely nuts.
>
---snip


>What is amazing on this particular issue is that progressives are winning
>legislatively on the issue - the very passage of the medical marijauna
>decision at the state level in California shows that, as do other wins
>around the country.  So the fight just needs to be taken to the national
>level.

Is not there a contradiction in these two statements?  Surely, with
increased state right the goddam South will go in the reactionary
direction, but they are going there anyway and taking the whole nation with
them by sending their sleazy politicos to Washington in droves.  With the
increase state rights, the progressive states will at least have a chance
of introducing progressive reforms (health care, proportional rep, public
transportation, sensible approach to drug abuse etc.) at the state level.
In 1863, maintaining the union was justified by fighting the slavery.  But
today the union is *the* evil empire - is it worth preserving?

PS.  I think everyone of us has a better chance of winning state lottery
than seeing the reforms we advocate at the national level.

wojtek