This is on the topic of the anonymous NYT op-ed piece.
Just a reaction to one particular discussion on a major news broadcasting network:
Why the hell are people talking about loyalty to the president, as in this particular president, as something that is even relevant at all to talk about?!
One of the fundamental principles of our democracy is that any sort of political loyalty, especially to the president, is loyalty to the office, not the person. Because that is one aspect of what it means to have loyalty to the country, one aspect of what it means to be patriotic.
And another fundamental principle of our democracy is the absolute refusal of despotism, the absolute rejection of absolute authority. To go against the authority of the president is not just a far cry from treason; it can be the ultimate form of patriotism and loyalty. (A higher loyalty, perhaps? ...)
Now let me add, just because I know some people will think I am saying something I am definitely not saying:
That does not guarantee it is the right thing to do or the best option in this or that set of circumstances; but sometimes, it will be. Whether or not something is patriotic has nothing to do with whether or not it is "correct" or the "right" thing or the best option, or whatever.
No comments:
Post a Comment