Mark Steyn of the National Review writes an article that reads like it came from an author that has taken the red pill. It’s unusual to see an author from this quintessential organ of American conservatism to comment on the world as it really is, instead of dwelling in the fairy tale democracy where electing Republicans could actually halt or reverse the leftwards march of American history.
His piece is a work of outrage art, walking through the many wounds inflicted against the rule of law in the putative American Republic in a single day. We see the the corruption of the IRS and the death of the rule of law, with cultural liberalism emerging as the new touchstone for legality used by the Supreme Court. Meanwhile, with the upcoming immigration bill the legislature finally crosses from sideshow into farce. Section 5(b)(1) reads:
Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall establish a strategy, to be known as the ‘Southern Border Fencing Strategy’ . . .
Contradicted in the same bill, in Section 5(b)(5):
Notwithstanding paragraph (1), nothing in this subsection shall require the Secretary to install fencing . . .
As a deliberative lawmaking body designed to secure the blessings of good governance for the American people, the US Senate is clearly lacking. But as a postmodern comedy troupe, one has to stand and applaud, “bravissimo!”.
It’s clear that if the very law contradicts itself a few paragraphs apart, then the law cannot be sovereign. And yet, according to Moldbug’s law of the conservation of sovereignty, something must be. If it is not the legislature or the law, then what could it be?