I never thought I would say a decent thing about Justice Scalia, but I just watched a segment of a discussion between him and Justice Breyer and he said something that simultaneously rang true and went a very long way to furthering my education about why he has made the almost indefensible decisions he has made.

The topic they were discussing (debating actually) was whether or not foreign law should be considered when rendering decisions. I'd never been able to figure out how Scalia got on the Court. I mean, the reasoning he used in his published opinions was almost exclusively idiotic. He writes like a uneducated hick incapable of following a modus ponens argument. On the show he said he never considers foreign law (except Old English law) in forming his opinion, that he didn't believe the Constitution was "a living document"; rather, the Court's objective today was to interpret law by the principles adopted when the Constitution was written. That wasn't new to me, I knew he was a literalist. But, Breyer had said that he thought law "emerged" from conversations. Breyer held that discussions amongst judges, lawyers and law students caused law to emerge. Further, he held that such conversations were important because it illuminated a "developing standard of decency" that should be a part of interpretting the Constitution.

Scalia taught me something with his response. He looked out at the crowd of attorneys, professors and law students and said, "Do you think you are representative of what the American people think is decent? Do you think you represent their values? Of course not. You are the tiny cream of this society." (That is almost a direct quote, he made gestures, whinces, etc. that are difficult to write, so a word or two I took some liberties with - but his meaning remains unchanged).

He's absolutely right, of course. I think the reason that I've been posting here for so many years is because I personally run into so few people who share my views on decency. In my normal life, I simply don't run into too many Simon_Jesters, Ashtons, jb4s, et al. The kind of person I normally run into is a marlowe. Why? Because Scalia is right. marlowe is representative of the commonly held view of decency in this country. With this in mind, Scalia's opinions make sense. They are idiotic because the views of the majority of Americans are idiotic and Scalia tries (and succeeds) in forming opinions consistent with the opinions of the majority.

Scalia said it was hubris for the cream to believe their view was superior to that of the masses. Breyer even yielded on this point. But why did he yield? Because he is supposed to believe in American democracy. And democracy means the tyranny (and stupidity) of the majority.

So, Antonin Scalia taught me to face the fact that I am not a "good American." I do not believe in American democracy. I want the law interpretted by Scalia's "cream." I want rule by an enlightened, educated, rational elite. I don't want what the bible-thumping, "Left Behind" reading, Benny Hinn, Jimmy Swaggart and Pat Robertson fans think is decent to become the standard for decency.

In the final analysis, the problem is not that we do not have representative government (i.e. democratically determined representation). The problem is that our current representation reflects too well the average American.

how is it that so few people vote? Silence is (at least) tacit acceptance.

But I don't anymore. I believe Jimmy Carter was right, that the last Presidential election was about the soul of the nation. Further, every poll I've ever seen leads me to the conclusion that RW philosophy *is* the prevalent American philosophy. Certainly my own experience with the populace supports this view.

I've been looking around for a very long time for some, hell any, evidence that this conclusion I've only recently come to, that RW philosophy accurately represents what the majority is thinking, is not correct. But I'm on empty. If the majority of people, for whatever reason, don't care to the point that they won't even vote *against* Dubya, then I don't think there is any hope that "secretly, the silent majority really isn't the mean-spirited, ego-maniacal, uncaring bunch their elected representatives would lead you to believe they are."

[Edits: God, don't write and talk about two separate things simultaneously]

[link|http://www.cspan.org/Search/advanced.asp?AdvancedQueryText=scalia&StartDateMonth=1&StartDateYear=2005&EndDateMonth=2&EndDateYear=2005&Series=&ProgramIssue=&QueryType=&QueryTextOptions=&ResultCount=10&SortBy=bestmatch|http://www.cspan.org...&SortBy=bestmatch]