At 10:55 PM 3/23/97 -0500, Robert Hettinga wrote:

Seen with the traditional liberal/conservative political worldview, it makes no sense for the famous compassionate liberal judge Earl Warren, whose supreme court presided over the creation of the world's largest welfare state, to advocate what is on its face an extremely conservative act -- the internment of thousands of Japanese Americans in concentration camps -- in his earlier role as a state governor.

Viewed from the statism/freedom standpoint, it is completely logical, that is, "We're your nation-state. We're stronger than you are, and we'll take what we damn well please from you, including your life, if necessary."

In the case of the Japanese concentration camps, it was taking the personal freedom of Japanese Americans. In the case of the judicially activist Warren court's welfare state, it was the confiscation of assets from productive members of society in violation of the laws of economics, which in turn caused misery for the increasing dole-dependant millions. People who are now much less free than they ever were before the creation of the "Great Society".

Which is yet another of the many reasons I can espouse an "extreme" solution to the problem, but one that I can honestly claim to not consider "extreme" at all! The way I see it, the lives of these thugs are not sufficiently valuable to lose sleep over their loss, when to keep them around means the kinds of abuse society has suffered for many generations. Jim Bell jimbell@pacifier.com