Thomas Slams 'Progressivism' While Critics Dig Up His Past, Pointing Fingers at 'Bribes' and Past Policies
Justice Clarence Thomas criticized 'progressivism' at the University of Texas law school, arguing it poses an existential threat to America's founding principles.
Commenters widely accused Thomas of hypocrisy, citing instances where he allegedly benefited from progressive policies while now attacking them. The debate sharply splits over the source of rights: some argue rights are inalienable natural rights, while Thomas implies they are conditional. Furthermore, many are attacking his motives, suggesting his critique stems from financial influence or patronage rather than pure principle.
The consensus view sees Thomas's critique as ideologically suspect and hypocritical, fundamentally undermining the premise that the government derives its just power from the people. The major fault line remains the accusation of financial corruption or misplaced ideology versus the concept of inherent rights versus government-granted rights.
Key Points
Thomas's critique of progressivism is hypocritical.
The critique centers on his alleged past benefits from policies he now attacks (Storyteller_Refugee).
Rights are inherent and pre-existing, not granted by the government.
LordMayor argued that government merely protects rights that already exist in people.
Thomas's statements undermine the founding principle of popular sovereignty.
billyclark stated the ability to vote and change government is the most basic premise, not fixed values.
Thomas's criticism is motivated by money or political favors.
Multiple sources cited concerns over 'bribes' or Harlan Crow, implying compromised motives.
Progressivism aims to improve America by pointing out current flaws.
NekoKoneko differentiated this from the 'infantile' refusal to criticize the nation seen in conservative stances.
Justice Thomas has a history of supporting wealthy influence in policy.
Users pointed to his professional involvement in pushing legislation like Citizens United.
Source Discussions (3)
This report was synthesized from the following Lemmy discussions, ranked by community score.