Re: Popular Justice and The Rule of Law -- 1

[Justin Schwartz <jschwart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Sorry if I'm wordy. It's an occupational hazard of philosophers and
lawyers. (Though I thought I was being consise.) But we are still not
quite agreeing. The rule of law is superior form of justice even when it
is a class-based rule of law administered in the interests of an
antagonistic class. The difference this makes is that of being subject to
arbitrary power depending on the individual whims of our masters (no rule
of law) or having well-established rules to which we can appeal and which
constrain, to some degree, the power of the rulers. This is no
inconsiderable difference. Bourgeois law is better than none. --jks

On Sat, 24 Feb 1996, Scott Marshall wrote:

> Justin I think this is just a wordy way of saying what I was getting at:
> rule of law is only a form of class justice depending on which class is
> administering it at the time. It is only a superior form of justice in
> working class hands. This is very clear in the US where the rule of law
> codifies corproate domination and class injustice for the working class and
> oppressed people. This in no way makes the struggle to use rule of law for
> the benefit of the working class where possible a useless thing. You of all
> people must have a class based sence of rulr of law if you hope to use your
> law degree for the good of the working class.
>
> Scott
>
> At 02:36 AM 2/24/96 -0500, you wrote:
> >
> >Like Scott, I agree that popular justice has its moments. Like Leo, I
> >regard the rule of law as an unalloyed good--a term derived from E.P.
> >Thompson, in the conclusion of his brilliant and savage study of the class
> >rule of law in 18th century Britain (Whigs and Hunters). To say that the
> >rule of law does not solve all problems connected with injustice is not to
> >say that we have an adequate substitute for it. Least of all does it
> >undermine the idea of the rule of law to observe that in a class society
> >the disadvantaged are more likely to be subject to its rigors. That is a
> >condemnation of the society, not the rule of law.
> >
> >(Interest advisory: I'm a law student.)
> >
> >--Justin
>
>
>
>      --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---





     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

     ------------------