Passage Publishing's Controversial Stance on Judicial Authority Sparks Debate

Passage Publishing, an independent publisher, has ignited widespread discussion with its provocative assertion that "the only way to make the changes our civilization needs to survive is to wrestle power away from the courts." This statement, attributed to the publisher, suggests a fundamental re-evaluation of the judiciary's role in societal progression and governance.

The publisher further elaborated on its position, stating, "After all: the more power we generate—the more altruisms we can do with it!" This phrase implies a belief that concentrated power, once removed from judicial oversight, can be more effectively wielded for benevolent societal advancements.

Passage Publishing, led by Jonathan Keeperman (also known as "Lomez"), is recognized as a "far-right and 'new right'" entity. It has gained attention for publishing works that align with conservative and neoreactionary ideologies, including those by figures like Curtis Yarvin and Steve Sailer, and even reprinting works by historical reactionary authors. This ideological alignment provides crucial context for understanding the publisher's critique of established judicial systems.

The "New Right" movement often expresses skepticism towards judicial power, viewing it as a potential impediment to its political and social agendas. Critics from this perspective frequently advocate for judicial deference to elected branches or argue for a reinterpretation of constitutional authority that limits the judiciary's influence. This broader ideological current suggests that Passage Publishing's statement reflects a desire within certain conservative circles to minimize judicial checks and balances in favor of a more assertive executive or legislative authority to implement desired societal changes. The term "altruisms" in this context, while seemingly positive, can be interpreted as a justification for wielding power without traditional constraints, under the premise of achieving a greater good as defined by this particular ideological framework.

The call to "wrestle power away from the courts" directly challenges the principle of judicial independence and the separation of powers, cornerstones of many democratic systems designed to prevent the concentration and potential abuse of power. This stance has undoubtedly fueled ongoing debates about the balance of power within government and the role of the judiciary in contemporary society.