America lost an important member of the family last night. Supreme Court Justice, Ruth Bader Ginsburg succumbed to complications of cancer and passed away yesterday. And we should be thankful for the value she played in our lives and her contribution to American history. Her work on the Supreme Court has been groundbreaking and led towards progress for all. I am always one to mourn the loss of someone of integrity and worthy of respect. As a fellow human being, empathy and sympathy towards an intellectual who runs among us, providing food for thought and helping us to live better lives is something we should cherish. We should be thankful she was with us and provided goodness for the welfare of the nation.
And that’s where it should end. Her friends and family should have some peace and comfort, we the American people should be thankful we had her and history should reflect upon her service admirably. But what I saw on the social medias last night (and surely to continue for weeks to come) was a panic, mainly among liberals. There was this sheer feeling of awfulness as if the loss of Ginsburg now meant the loss of themselves. As if when she passed away, they did too. A scroll through concerns showed a fear of losing ground that Ginsburg helped pave. There was this atmosphere that her bodily loss now meant a loss of everything she contributed. As if the loss of William Shakespeare meant no more excellent contributions to literature.
So while so many were watching what I can only assume a rollback of American progress, I was watching the extreme reactions wondering, do any of these people know the name of even one Supreme Court Justice in their home state? Or how about on their appellate court? Or circuit court? District court? When you go to vote, do you even recognize any of the names you’re voting for to sit on those courts (the ones you do vote for)? Probably not.
Just like your local government, city government, county and state, do you know anything about anyone below the name of your governor? This is interesting to me; in that, I wonder why so much attention is paid to those on the federal level but not on a local level.
Setting that aside, my main concentration regarding the death of Ginsburg was how so many people were showing a fear that the loss of one Supreme Court Justice now meant a loss of gains and progress. As if the loss of a gatekeeper now meant a tidal wave of devolution. And that may or may not happen (although I’m guessing Roe vs Wade, gay marriage and all the other hot button, liberal issues are safe) what was of most interest to me was how the federal government has become so immense and overbearing that the loss of one person now meant a possible loss of freedoms, rights and privileges. Isn’t that something?
For me, I’d rather we work towards instituting a government where the loss of a member doesn’t mean the loss of rights and progress. Like in the scientific community, a loss of a scientist does not diminish her contributions. A loss of an astronomer doesn’t take their work to the grave with them. Instead, quality progress is retained and built upon. For me, it’d be better doing government like this rather than fighting and scrambling and battling every few years to get more gatekeepers.
For me, I’d rather not have to know the names of the Supreme Court Justices, federal or state, or the names of my mayor or the president or my senators. I’d rather the job be so trivial as to be put on a part-time basis, having these folks come together maybe two weeks every year and in times of national emergency to go over the business of the country.
The loss of one person should never be this serious for it’s an indication the government is much too powerful. The best course of action is to reduce its influence rather than put another person in the role, just to pull our hair out again the next time.