FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
Personal Rights
Article 40
1. All citizens shall, as human persons, be held equal before the law. This shall not be held to mean that the State shall not in its enactments have due regard to differences of capacity, physical and moral, and of social function.
This principle codified in our Constitution is a Nationalist principle, a common sense and just principle, and it is one which runs somewhat contrary to liberalism which, while seeking to espouse the noble goal of equality of people before the law, does not recognise the inherent differences among people. Liberalism is guilty of confounding equity with equality of moral, cognitive and other differences between people.
Liberalism is also guilty of treating the noble principle of equity as an absolute, which, is foolish. Common sense dictates that the principle of equal treatment of people must be be limited, not only for reasons of practicality but for the reason of self-interest; we as a nation must limit our moral sphere for our own good. Alas, leftists believe that we should extend our nobility to all of humanity. But human affairs are far too complicated for absolutes for one absolute is bound to conflict with another; the best we can do is strive to uphold principles with the knowledge that our principles must sometimes be put aside or sometimes restricted or whatever the case may be.
‘Liberalism is also guilty of treating the noble principle of equity as an absolute, which, is foolish.’
I would argue that Noble principles and, not a singular ‘equality’, but equalities (many operating in tandem on a functional basis, with due regard for personality and quality, all located within a unity principle), are absolute principles which cannot be subject to measurement or a material interpretation, nor indeed attributed only to certain nations/peoples and ushered away from others.
I agree that certain nations do exhibit a Nobility of conscience and action more than others (but this fluctuates with time, place and sometimes even these nations then become ignoble for a time), but I also must point out that all nations do not display Nobility in exactly the same way in an outward/exterior sense (which is where the confusion of the masses begins, thus the false notion of the ONE and ONLY equality [which is undoubtedly the result of a hostile ideological framework], in which all peoples are subject to the same standard, with no regard for differences in innate character or traits).
Aristotle called this forced egalitarianism the ‘greatest injustice’ as it deprived men of their special talents and character, thus rendering them ‘equally valueless’, as it is precisely the differences in men that give them their particular value in the first place. When we think logically, the only way all men can actually be equal is in the lowest possible sense, or in being considered akin to mass-produced objects (which is exactly what the present equality entails).
But all men can certainly attain that superior inner rank, which is the same in all cases and peoples, no matter its outward manifestations.
What is embodied here in our Constitution is a remanent of the Aryo-Gaelic legal tradition, which can be found in a more potent and accurate form as in our Old laws and procedures.
In these Traditions, it is stated that Equality(s) and similar ideals are derived from Universal principles (resulting from the natural and what is above it) which exclude no person, but they effect each differently according to his station and capabilities, and this ties in with our present day Constitution. Its just that none in the ‘West’ are capable of this thinking anymore, thus they confuse the Equality principles with the modernist ideology of the ‘Equality ™’ – a classic example of trying to extract the ‘greater from the lesser’ and the attempt to pull everything down to its lowest forms, separating it from the its higher forms. And so we have to ‘dumb’ it all down, equality = bad, nationalism = good.
The central problem with liberalism/leftism is that is does not treat equality(s) as a universal IDEAL arising from the principle, but instead puts it forth as being universally immanent and self-contained within every man in exactly the same measure. This is the source of the delusion of the modern mindset.
As the Hindu God Lord Krishna once said: “I exist in everything, but everything does not exist in me.”
The leftist believes his mindset exists in every place, in the same fashion, throughout all time (and all to come) and so sees no reason not to spread his senseless all over the world while seeking to ‘develop’ it even further when things prove to be a failure. (which they always are).
In reality, ‘leftist’ ideas exist in the world only as figment of their own collective imagination, nowhere is it found actually.