Not Enough Justice?
by Joseph Rowlands
A common type of question Objectivists get involves some horrific action a person can take that is technically not a violation of anyone's rights. This may include the torture of animals, a guy is emotionally abusive to his girlfriend, parents who refuse to educate their children, or a wife who insists on cooking vegetarian dishes. All of them travesties of justice, and yet the law is not allowed to remedy them.
One reason why these questions are so popular is the sense that if the law cannot punish these acts, nobody will. It's infuriating to see people do horrible, horrible things, and get away with it without any cost to themselves. It seems so simple to just put a little more power into the hands of the government, and then this problem can be solved. No longer will evil people be free to hurt others by carefully avoiding the actual initiation of force.
Of course, that's not really a good solution. If the government gets involved in every immoral act, you have a far worse evil on your hands. We need to be free to live our lives, even if that means being free to do the unsavory and unpopular. Freedom to screw up is our most sacred liberty.
But that still leaves us with this little issue, and the real problem behind it. The reason many of us think that evil can get away with it is that they often do. There's not enough justice in the world.
It's a fundamental problem. In criminal justice, if the system is known to produce unjust results, you start to get vigilantes. People take justice into their own hands, because they know the system is failing. Ultimately, if the injustice goes on for too long, people may demand a change to the system.
And that's why people are willing to let the government solve the problem of injustice in social affairs. If the current system doesn't work, you modify the system. And overnight you have the government creating animal rights, making it illegal to say anything rude or offensive (and there are a lot of people out there with no sense of humor!), second guessing parents on every decision, making gambling illegal, etc., etc., etc.
The real issue is that people don't take justice very seriously. People are too anxious to forgive others, allowing them to get away with their actions. Families evade the immoral actions of a member, in an attempt to be "good parents" or what-not. Employees avoid getting a coworker in trouble so they can all get along. Friends are blindly loyal, and make excuses for bad actions.
Justice always seems to be somebody else's job. People get good at protecting themselves from the immoral actions of someone they know, but they don't bother with trying to make that person pay for their actions. And so he goes on down the list, using and abusing others, each person smart enough only to be burnt once, but never attempting to stop the pattern.
Additionally, there are many institutional reinforcements to injustice. If an employee is lazy or disruptive, you have to tread carefully before firing him because he can sue for any number of reasons. Even if someone wants to be just, the system is rigged against justice in that case.
How many other examples of institutional injustices are there? Lawsuits are plentiful and are often settled because the costs of going to trial are substantial. Even if you win the case, you may lose overall. It's difficult to pursue justice when it costs you a substantial amount. What about non-legal injustices? Racism and sexism are examples. Or any of the other buzzwords. Ageism anyone?
As long as people feel that justice can't be done, they're going to look for easy alternatives. But if a society is immoral, a government cannot fix the problems. An unjust system has to be addressed through non-governmental forces. It has to be done by individuals. We need a society that values justice not just in an abstract way, but in a very personal way. We need to remove barriers to justice. We need to give support to those who are bring about justice. We need individuals to see themselves as the agents of change. It may not fully satisfy those asking the questions, but it'll be a fine start.
Discuss this Article (39 messages)
|
