[1]The term “useful idiot” is a phrase coined by Ludwig von Mises — used by communists to describe erstwhile friends in the social democracy movement. Often held in total contempt by the hardliners, these do-gooders would go forth, demagogue, and simply wreak they havoc they were employed (cheaply) to perform.
Enter Donald Trump — or his ever-dwindling coterie of actual supporters.
First off, Trump has decided that the Second Amendment is a mere suggestion (yes it’s true — read a freakin’ article or two) and is going to influence — get this — the NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION to allow — yes, it gets better — for the FBI to unilaterally and without due process suspend an individual’s civil liberties without due process of law.
Erick Erickson over at The Resurgent has the predictable response of any conservative [2]:
This is a terrible idea and a flat out cave by Donald Trump. You cannot deny constitutional rights to American citizens because the government is suspicious of you. The IRS has tried with tea party groups. The Department of Homeland Security has labeled returning veterans and conservatives as suspicious. If we did what Donald Trump wants, we could all find ourselves on a watch list to deny us our second amendment rights.
Daily Wire piles on [3]:
And that’s the problem. Trump will continue to drag the Republican Party and other conservative organizations to the left, and the media will help him do it.
Aaron Bandler comes up with six great reasons why a “no fly list” shouldn’t be the red card for suspending constitutional liberties [4]:
1. It violates due process.
2. Anyone on the terror watch list can already be prevented by the federal government from purchasing a gun.
3. Despite what leftists say, those on the terror watch list are not prohibited from flying.
4. It would be more efficient to simply indict those on the terror watch list if there is enough evidence to suggest they’re involved with terrorism.
5. There is a better alternative to the current proposal.
6. The terror watch list is nothing more than a distraction, as the terrorist was removed from the terror watch list when he purchased a firearm.
Oh, but that’s just one or two places! Surely the Washington Free Beacon can’t be piling on… [5]
He [Trump] has also tweeted his support for the proposal (backed by Barack Obama) to take away the right to buy a gun for those on government watch lists. For those trying to figure out what this means: it means he has caved on gun control. So much for the argument that he’s better than Hillary on Constitutional issues that go before the Supreme Court.
Ouch. Well, what about PJ Media [6] — they’ve always been so kind to the Trumpenproletariat, right?
Although gun control (or lack thereof) has absolutely nothing to do with the Orlando terror attack, Democrats are seizing the opportunity to get it passed nonetheless. They are joined by Donald Trump.
Is there any part of the Republican base The Donald won’t turn his back on?
Running out of friends quick here… Daily Signal [7], perhaps? Sure they will think Trump’s plan will work, right?
We also know that Mateen was actually once on a terrorist watch list, then taken off of it. The FBI interviewed him twice, in 2013 and 2014, because of his stated sympathies with Islamist extremists and contacts with an American who later died in a suicide bombing in Syria. We know that he took trips to Saudi Arabia in 2011 and 2012, although we don’t know what he was doing there.
Holy crap — was that former Senator Jim DeMint saying that? Why yes… yes it was.
Let’s try something else here — a history lesson. When then Governor Lord John Dunmore attempted to cow the Virginians into submission, Dunmore attempted the same thing — and when “constitutional gun control” didn’t work? [8] Dunmore confiscated the gunpowder from the magazine in Williamsburg.
That didn’t go over very well with patriots like Patrick Henry, who responded to the colonial “no fly list” with an answer of his own [8]:
The governor said rumors of a slave insurrection had prompted him to have the powder taken from the brick Magazine, which he termed “a very insecure depositary,” and loaded on the twenty-gun man-of-war Fowey, “a place of perfect security.” The deed had been done at night, he said, to shield the population from undue alarm, and they had his word of honor that he would return the powder inside half an hour if the slaves rose.
To the surprise of many, Speaker Randolph and other moderates in the delegation accepted the explanation and acquiesced in the gunpowder’s staying aboard theFowey. They persuaded the people of Williamsburg to refrain from violence. It was not as easy to deflect the anger of the citizenry of surrounding counties—Patrick Henry led hundreds of armed men on a march to Williamsburg from Hanover, and they would disband only when the colony’s receiver general, Robert Corbin, reimbursed them for the gunpowder, saving face for all.
So much for constitutional gun control of the British variant.
Why then do the “useful idiots” surrounding Trump buy into the argument? After all, some are fine patriots and gun owners who have to be troubled by this sudden betrayal of Second Amendment rights (not principles, rights) by the presumptive Republican nominee — right?
The excuse today? Islamist terrorism. The excuse then? Slave insurrection.
Anyone believe that is a reason to set down your right to self-defense? Certainly the patriots of yesteryear didn’t [9]. Rightly, they called such practices a “monstrous absurdity” — one that seems to be embraced with both arms by those huddled around the Trump Train and hoping to catch a ride (to where?)
[10]Of course, for conservatives to leave it up to an investigator or a bureaucratic tribunal to determine who is and who is not worthy of the Second Amendment opens a dangerous hole in a very American understanding of who we are and why the Founders enshrined self-defense as a personal, individual right.
If you wouldn’t accept limits on your 1A rights, why should we accept limitations on your 2A rights? Would anyone in their right mind accept a limit on their rights to free speech because a federal institution decided to put you on a “watch list”? Free expression because you are on a “no fly list”? What happens when government makes a mistake and a perfectly sane and rational human being is denied their constitutionally-defined rights?
Of course, taking Islamist terrorism seriously is the key. We have tools to do this. Our freedoms are what make us unique. They are the reason why the terrorists come here to kill us. Sacrificing those freedoms in the pursuit of a little temporary safety?
What would Patrick Henry say?