Two Competing Visions of Law

[iframe width="640" height="450" src=""]

We often don’t realize there are two distinct visions of law in the world. The first, represented by this video clip, is the idea that law should be used to gain advantage over others. Those who make less, you see, should vote for those who will take away that which those who make more have, so it can be “redistributed.”

The people at large should, in this view, vote their “self interest,” forcing big companies to pay more in taxes so the money can be given to the people at large.

There is an alternate view of the law, though.

[iframe width="640" height="450" src=""]

In this view, once you’ve destroyed the law to gain the advantage you so crave, you will stand alone against the wind. The laws you destroy are the laws that protect everyone equally —you, your family, and yes, even the devil himself.

So which is really against our “self interest?” To tear down the laws because a company is hiding behind them to make more money? Or to leave the laws standing?

The problem isn’t so simple, of course, because large corporations have, for years, engaged in tearing down and shaping laws for their own advantage. But the solution isn’t to tear down all law, the solution is to go back and rethink what law is, and what it means. The solution is equality before the law, rather than an ever complex law code that bends this way and that to protect this group or that group (because they’ve risen to political power long enough to bend the law just there for their own favor).

What is really in our “self interest” is a set of laws that are consistent, and consistently applied to all people (including corporations). What is really in our “self interest” is a set of laws that can be read in a matter of days, rather than years (or lifetimes), and understood.

If everyone votes only for their own gain, and not for the gain of all, democracy turns to mobocracy, and republics turn to oligarchies.

No comments yet to Two Competing Visions of Law