I am 38 and just now finding all of this stuff interesting. I feel like I grew up in a "live and let live" world. Oh, wait! I did! That's fine to an extent, but not at the loss of common sense and relativism.
Keep these posts coming - I love learning!!
I haven't read Weigel's article and will have to put it on hold till grades are in (one week off). However, a lot of sixties-bashing that I've read over the years portrays that era in an overly negative light. Certainly there IS plenty to be disturbed by during that period (numerous assassinations, riots, a brutal war in which the use of Napalm was justified by American military leadership, and plenty of lies from the government to its people -- particularly if you expand that decade to include the Watergate events). And yes, it was also the decade of free love, acid used openly and without regard for the human consequences, etc. But this was also the time when people stood up for their civil rights (and the civil rights of others); this was a time when women began to attend colleges and universities in greater numbers; this was a period when students (and others) stood up to try to stop a war which they believed to be misguided and unwinnable.
As for judicial activism, I suppose that would have to include Brown v. the Board (which is from 1954, I know, but it's not that far off from what we normally think of as "The Sixties") and court decisions that permitted James Meredith to enroll at the University of Mississippi, etc. (Waiting around for "democratic persuasion" is great when that's a realistic, viable option; however, when basic civil rights/human rights are concerned, sometimes the courts do need to step in on behalf of, for instance, citizens' rights that are guaranteed -- or at least strongly implied -- under, say, the 14th Amendment. If someone takes away MY constitutional rights, I darn well expect the courts to practice some "judicial activism" and not simply wait till my oppressors can be persuaded to act nice. As Dr. King observed more than once, blacks had been plenty patient -- for a few hundred years, actually. Judicial activism does have its place. (Side note: Ever notice how those decisions with which we tend to disagree are the same ones we're mostly likely to label as judicial activism? That's how it is with most people, anyway. I didn't hear many conservatives cry "Judicial activism!" when the Gore v. Bush decision was announced!) .... Sorry for the much too lengthy comment here.
Steve
Not a problem, Steve. I think you'll like Weigel's article. He does criticize people standing up for their rights or judicial activism per say, but rather what comes immediately afterwards.
Commenting by HaloScan
