Opinion of the phrase "States Rights"
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 18, 2024, 10:54:00 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Individual Politics (Moderator: The Dowager Mod)
  Opinion of the phrase "States Rights"
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Poll
Question: Opinion of the phrase "States Rights"
#1
Freedom Phrase
 
#2
Horrible Phrase
 
#3
Neutral
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 61

Author Topic: Opinion of the phrase "States Rights"  (Read 4681 times)
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,385
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: May 20, 2012, 02:57:58 PM »

Absolutely vile, horrible phrase. Reactionary to the extreme, in pretty much every context it's ever been used.
Logged
RI
realisticidealist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,687


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: May 20, 2012, 02:58:46 PM »
« Edited: May 20, 2012, 03:00:22 PM by realisticidealist »

An evil phrase used by people with evil ideologies.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: May 20, 2012, 04:49:24 PM »

Positive, tho it has been tarnished by the uses to which it has been put.  But even in those cases, it served as a sort of safety valve, generally allowing volatile issues in which there was a strong sectional difference of opinion to be resolved more peacefully than otherwise would have been the case.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,890
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: May 20, 2012, 05:34:12 PM »

Systematically used as an excuse to restrict human rights.
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: May 20, 2012, 05:34:44 PM »

has a poor history
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,568


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: May 20, 2012, 05:45:03 PM »

Horrible phrase. Used extensively to advance right-wing causes, but ignored where it would help liberals, like Gonzales v. Carhart  or Bush v. Gore.
Logged
🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸
shua
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 25,658
Nepal


Political Matrix
E: 1.29, S: -0.70

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: May 20, 2012, 05:56:45 PM »

While I agree with what it sometimes means, it's too associated with awful things in the past and it's easily misunderstood.  It's true as some critics have said "states don't have rights, people do."  At the same time, states play an important role in balancing the impulses of the national government to take power and infringe on those rights.  Federalism or subsidiarity are better terms.
Logged
The world will shine with light in our nightmare
Just Passion Through
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,130
Norway


Political Matrix
E: -6.32, S: -7.48

P P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: May 20, 2012, 06:17:49 PM »
« Edited: May 20, 2012, 06:22:23 PM by Senator Scott »

A phrase libertarians like to use to say that government restricting people's rights is okay, just as long that it's at the state level.
Logged
Vazdul (Formerly Chairman of the Communist Party of Ontario)
Vazdul
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,295
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: May 20, 2012, 06:39:34 PM »

Absolutely vile, horrible phrase. Reactionary to the extreme, in pretty much every context it's ever been used.
^^
Logged
Frodo
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 24,503
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: May 20, 2012, 06:43:07 PM »

While I agree with what it sometimes means, it's too associated with awful things in the past and it's easily misunderstood.  It's true as some critics have said "states don't have rights, people do."  At the same time, states play an important role in balancing the impulses of the national government to take power and infringe on those rights.  Federalism or subsidiarity are better terms.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Shua says it best.  The phrase itself may be too tightly entwined with the Confederacy and Jim Crow that it can never be fully restored, but the federalist principle behind it remains as crucial as ever in balancing against the power of the federal government. 
Logged
RI
realisticidealist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,687


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: May 20, 2012, 07:33:49 PM »

Federalism is inherently a bad idea. Even without that history, it would be a terrible phrase.
Logged
Fmr President & Senator Polnut
polnut
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,489
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -2.71, S: -5.22

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: May 20, 2012, 07:47:41 PM »

In theory... potentially fine, as it's been practiced... pretty fricking awful...
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: May 20, 2012, 10:25:23 PM »

He was a decent poster.
Logged
TJ in Oregon
TJ in Cleve
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,952
United States


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: 6.96

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: May 20, 2012, 10:29:09 PM »

meh

It seems to be used to dodge policy questions in a variety of circumstances, but still has its useful role in American politics. There are some perfectly valid reasons why states might have different laws.
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,385
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: May 20, 2012, 10:51:03 PM »


Albeit not as bad an idea as "Communitarianism." Cheesy
Logged
Redalgo
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,681
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: May 21, 2012, 12:34:36 AM »

While I agree with what it sometimes means, it's too associated with awful things in the past and it's easily misunderstood.  It's true as some critics have said "states don't have rights, people do."  At the same time, states play an important role in balancing the impulses of the national government to take power and infringe on those rights.  Federalism or subsidiarity are better terms.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Shua says it best.  The phrase itself may be too tightly entwined with the Confederacy and Jim Crow that it can never be fully restored, but the federalist principle behind it remains as crucial as ever in balancing against the power of the federal government. 

Agreed, ya.
Logged
So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!
Rockingham
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 547


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: May 21, 2012, 02:09:21 AM »

Neutral. Remember that while states rights enabled states to retain slavery, they also allowed states to abolish slavery. Similarly states rights allowed abortion legality to gain a foothold, and has allowed gay marriage to gain a foothold.

As a matter of principle I prefer state action to federal action, simply because the US is so bloody diverse... it doesn't make much sense for Massachusetts, Hawaii, Utah and Georgia to be subject to the same socioeconomic policies...

I know a lot of leftwingers favour federal action as a means of keeping conservatism in check in red states... they should remember the same federal action curtails liberalism in blue states. If you have genuine confidence in your ideology you should feel comfortable delegating more authority to the states and letting the results speak for themselves.

Especially since red states are net winners in terms of federal revenue while blue states are net losers... more delegation of fiscal matters to states would be to the advantage of left leaning states financially.

It also happens to be more fundamentally democratic to have policy issues decided by 50 different units separately then it is for policy issues to be decided by one super unit combining those 50 units.
Logged
They put it to a vote and they just kept lying
20RP12
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,149
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.29, S: -7.13

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: May 21, 2012, 05:26:40 AM »

Freedom Phrase said the lone conservative libertarian as he was chased out of this thread.
Logged
fezzyfestoon
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,204
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: May 21, 2012, 11:45:26 AM »

The concept independent of its use in history is acceptable and even something I'd go so far as to promote, but like everyone's said so far, it's been used as a guise for some of the most unsavory political movements in our history.
Logged
Donerail
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,345
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: May 21, 2012, 12:04:32 PM »

Neutral: Freedom Phrase in concept, Horrible Phrase in application.
Logged
RI
realisticidealist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,687


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: May 21, 2012, 02:10:48 PM »


Albeit not as bad an idea as "Communitarianism." Cheesy

kthx. I am enlightened now.
Logged
Atlas Has Shrugged
ChairmanSanchez
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 38,043
United States


Political Matrix
E: 5.29, S: -5.04


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: May 21, 2012, 05:02:52 PM »

The foundation of this countries freedoms. Imagine if the Southern states had power over the whole government in the 1840's and enforced slavery upon the North. States Rights restricted them to the South.
Logged
Kaine for Senate '18
benconstine
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 30,329
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: May 21, 2012, 09:47:10 PM »

Positive, tho it has been tarnished by the uses to which it has been put.

My position exactly.  It's a good idea distorted by some bad men.
Logged
Oldiesfreak1854
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,674
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: June 22, 2012, 04:25:57 PM »
« Edited: June 22, 2012, 04:38:56 PM by Oldiesfreak1854 »

The people who used "states' rights" as an argument against civil rights legislation were abusing the phrase.  It was never relevant to desegregation because the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment (passed shortly after the Civil War) stated that Congress could pass any legislation to ensure equal protection under the law.  I asked one of my PoliSci instructors this question and he said that by making these arguments, the Southern states were essentially calling for a return to the Articles of Confederation (the federal government before the Constitution), which was too weak and limited federal powers too much to be effective.  And for that matter, states' rights were originally created for a purpose much the opposite: it was intended to keep slavery confined to the South and prevent it from expanding onto a national scale.  Even today, you could give states all the rights you (or they) wanted and racial segregation is still NEVER coming back.  (Good riddance!)  I would agree with the opinion posted earlier that it was a good idea distorted and abused by some very bad (as well as a few well-intentioned, but misguided) people.
Logged
H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY
Alfred F. Jones
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,062
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: June 23, 2012, 10:28:31 AM »

Normally it would be good, but I said horrible phrase because it's a modern-day code for racism.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.062 seconds with 14 queries.