fidesquaerens (marta_bee) wrote,
fidesquaerens
marta_bee

Dogbert/Dilbert 2012!

Apparently Scott Adams has announced his candidacy for the U.S. presidency. Not seriously, of course, but he unrolled a pretty interesting agenda, in a thought-provoking kind of way.

I (basically) agree with most of it, but the Supreme Court bit threw me for a loop:

For my Supreme Court appointments, I'd pick qualified candidates whose opinions map to the majority of Americans. If you don't like where the majority is at, change the minds of your fellow citizens. If you succeed, and I'm still in office, I'll pick the next candidate to reflect that change in public opinion. The Supreme Court works for the country, not the President. My opinions shouldn't matter. I'd only act as a safeguard in case the majority decided to discriminate against some group in particular. I don't like bullies.


There's an obvious misunderstanding on judicial review toward the end (the courts are supposed to safeguard against the president, not the other way). But what really tripped my bad-idea radar was the idea that the Supreme Court should represent the majority of Americans. I get that Mr. Adams is saying that's instead of representing his own ideology (or his party's), but the goal shouldn't be to have nine justices who all represent the majority. If they were more or less identical then eight of those justices would be redundant. :-) Rather, you want a variety of judges. Each representing a different bias b/c biases are inevitable, doing their best to account for the bias and balancing each other out when they can't.

(Aside: It's amazing how much I see Hume's aesthetics in far-flung topics, like this. Because this is just how he thinks we get rules about what's beautiful...)

I'm also not so sure about this "play the center" approach. I wish it would work, but it's a little like disamament: it only makes sense if both sides are willing to give it a go...


I'm curious - which of these ideas would you disagree, and why?

This entry was originally posted at http://fidesquaerens.dreamwidth.org/22724.html. Please comment there using OpenID.
Tags: politics
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 0 comments