>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Justin Schwartz" <jkschw at hotmail.com>
>
> > Stop right there. I reject liberal rights of property as we have known
>them.
> > I'm a socialist. . . . . what foirm
> > propert rights should take, and I think they should be socialist.
>
>=================
>Ok, and when the majority uses universal suffrage to change property rights
>to "private" would you
>have an elite cadre of judges paternalistically overruling them?
Doomsday, not me, I'm _super_-conservative on judicial review, in the general neighborhood of Judge Learned Hand and Justice Holmes. "If the people want to take the country to Hell, I'll help them do it," Holmes said, "It's my job." An admirable attitude for a judge, in my view.
Or would you set the contitutional
>bias of the State to prevent majoritarianism on this issue?
>
>
Sure, put it in the Constitution. It's part of the framework of society, if the people want to amend the Constitution or have a revolution, who's gonna stop 'em?
Are you trying to accuse me of being too democratic (willing to let the people choose capitalism over socialism) or not democratic enough (unwilling to do that)? Put me in the "too democratic" ledger.
jks
_________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.