“These principles include respect for the authority of rule and of rulers; respect for the hierarchies needed for society to function.” And: “a candid willingness to ‘legislate morality’ “. 3/22
Of course, the aim of Vermeulen’s constitutionalism “is certainly not to maximize individual autonomy or to minimize the abuse of power,” but rather “to ensure that the ruler has the power needed to rule well”. 4/22
“The claim, from the notorious joint opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, that each individual may “define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life” should be... 5/22
... not only rejected but stamped as abominable, beyond the realm of the acceptable forever after.” Good-bye gay marriage, abortion rights, or just your own concept of how to pursue happiness. 6/22
By now, Vermeulen is in full swing: “So too should the libertarian assumptions central to free-speech law and free-speech ideology—that government is forbidden to judge the quality and moral worth of public speech—fall under the ax.” 7/22
There are 2 ways to abolish citizens’ equality before the law. Vermeulen owns both. One that many self-declared socialists will share is the misconception that legal equality means that all people will have an equal life and equal outcomes: 8/22
“Libertarian conceptions of property rights & economic rights will have to go, as they bar the state from enforcing duties of community & solidarity in the use & distribution of resources.” 9/22
The other is the concept that the state authority knows best, its subjects too immature to know what is good for them: “Just authority in rulers can be exercised for the good of subjects, if necessary even against the subjects’ own perceptions of what is best for them.” 10/22
Father knows best. In Vermeulen’s case, he literally means Fathers, or perhaps Cardinals. But it gets worse. 11/22
This will be familiar to people versed in 1930s European authoritarianism: “Unions, guilds & crafts, cities & localities, and other solidaristic associations will benefit from the presumptive favor of the law, as will the traditional family.” (In Austria, the Ständestaat.) 12/22
In Vermeulen’s attempt to dust off the failed ideologies of the past, this is his hook to the here and now: “constitutional law will define in broad terms the authority of the state to protect the public’s health and well-being, protecting the weak from pandemics”. 13/22
This is the part I found particularly contemptible. Just like the Catholic Church of the Middle Ages, he understands that to get people to act against their own freedoms and interests, you have to inculcate fear. 14/22
Linked, again, to sexual repression: “The state will enjoy authority to curb the social & economic pretensions of the urban-gentry liberals who so often place their own satisfactions (financial and sexual) & the good of their class or social milieu above the common good.” 15/22
[Would rural gays, then, be able to pursue their abomination without being persecuted, ahem, prosecuted by the illiberal legal system? Or members of other social milieus? Who knows.] 16/22
Why, then, waste so much time on this screed? Because Vermeulen’s “illiberal legalism” is the pseudo-intellectual twin of “illiberal democracy”. Vermeulen, Barr, Rees-Mogg and the like — wealthy, older, Catholic reactionaries with good manners & a paternalistic ethos — ... 17/22
...surely view Trump, or Boris Johnson, or Viktor Orban, or Matteo Salvini, with a mixture of curiosity and disgust, but as useful idiots who help them to nudge society where they couldn’t get to on their own: paternalistic clerical authoritarianism. 18/22
The clerical authoritarianism of Portugal, Austria or even Spain never became quite as nasty as “purer” ideologies such as the National Socialists or Communism, largely due to its internal contradictions. 19/22
(It’s pretty hard to square Leviticus 18:29 with Mark 12:31, even when you try to bridge it with Matthew 5:17. And of course, Salazar, Franco or Dollfuss had a hard time explaining away Matthew 23:4-10.) 20/22
But it was still nasty enough. It’s also a long time ago, and Western societies tend to have short memories. When Vermeulen writes of the common good, or a just and well-ordered society, there will be a large amount of generally well-meaning citizens who will listen. 21/22
Democracy, human rights & personal freedom require vigilant defenses. Attacks will come from communitarian, from nationalists, from reactionaries. Some will be clumsy, some more elegant. We need to recognize them for what they are, and reject them before they take root. 22/22
