Since my post yesterday shining a light on the travesty, I’ve sought to understand what was missing, in how some of the comments have gone. To get one thing out of the way first, some took objection to my analogy of German soldiers tossing Jews in boxcars to meet a certain fate.
I could deal with that myself, but let’s let a German commenter do it.
There is nothing wrong with the comparison. As a German, I laugh about the fear of inappropriate Godwins. Mostly they are right.
The movie “the Reader” shows it perfectly. She was just doing her job (“legal”) and at the same time was hiding her own incompetence (illiteracy). […]
Those people were our great-grandfathers and seemingly normal people. But still, they fucked up big time. We should not suppress history but learn from it, and the 3rd Reich is one of the best and clearest periods in history of evil philosophy with all its implications: psychology, politics, propoganda, ethics, epistemology and metaphysics. You’ll find it all in the books. Heck, Hitler wrote his own philosophy: Mein Kampf. What a disgrace it’s banned here.
I relate Nazism to today’s politicians and thinking all the time. The phrases are identical. […]
Every law is a gun to your head.
Today’s society ONLY works because some people at least choose to think for their own, break laws, invent stuff and don’t get sucked up in the system.
To this I would add that it’s important to understand that Germany was not an evil country. Germans were not evil. They were just like so many today: suckers for authority and someone to tell them what to do. Their principle fault lied in not being careful enough about what they asked for.
It’s that simple. The rest, as they say, is history. And history rolled right along on the back of ideas; which, actually, have consequences.
But the main issue with the whole post, and what prompted me to begin drafting in my head as I was out walking the dogs, is a principle disconnect I see all the time, for decades now. Let me illustrate it.
Suppose by some weird chance I come upon the scene of an atrocity. For the sake of drama, it’s a young girl who has just been raped and killed…and as I fall upon the scene, in the very final stage of dismemberment for later disposal, I notice there’s video surveillance. So I detain the assailant, retrieve the video, gain certainty about what transpired—not beyond reasonable doubt, but beyond any doubt—and I immediately dispatch him.
I then take the video to the local police, tell them I just willfully and in full conscience killed a man, and offer up my hands to be cuffed.
They immediately oblige.
Then they do their investigation, interrogate me, I tell them everything I know and did…and a few days later, the District Attorney files charges against me for 2nd degree murder—which would be exactly the correct charge per the law.
Here’s the point, and consider this carefully: the charge will not be “misapplication of justice.”
In fact, no one will ever argue that I didn’t see to sound competent justice. That argument, in fact, will be inadmissible, and the prosecutor and judge will be on overtime guard throughout, because my defense attorney will want to make sure the jury knows and understands that they can nullify the law if they wish.
In other words, the real fight going on is exactly not whether or not I did the right thing in moral terms, or even whether the state—after millions of dollars and a decade or more of appeals—would not have done exactly the same thing. The real fight in the court room, for the prosecution, will be to paint me as a wanton vigilante. More importantly, to construct a slippery slope and “send a message,” dropping context that true justice was actually done here. Most importantly, to convict me because, after all, every conviction is another notch in the club and jot in the file, leading to promotion and perhaps a career in politics.
That I did what that girl and her family would have wanted—not to mention pretty much all of society, potentially saving others that fate—matters not one tiny little bit.
What matters is that I grandstanded. I took their glory. They get to do that shit: and hold press conferences, have lights shown upon them, solidify their role.
…And so it is with Steve. The charge is not that he’s offering bad advice. In fact, he’s offering good advice, which everyone knows, but that’s irrelevant.
The chief justification is slippery slope.
The real reason is that he makes the North Carolina Board of Dietetics/Nutrition look like a bunch of incompetent fools.
Incompetent fools like:
- Michelle Futrell, MS, RD, LDN – Chair, Public Health
- Brenda Burgin Ross, MS, RD, LDN – Vice Chair, Clinical
- Richard W. Holden, Sr. – Treasurer, Public Member
- Kathleen Sodoma, RD, LDN – Secretary, Management
- Christie Nicholson, MS, RD, LDN, Private Practice
- Phyllis Hilliard, MPH, Public Member
- Cathleen E. Ostrowski, MS, RD, LDN, Education