| | |
|
AnatoleFrance 6 - 09 Feb 2010 - Main.NonaFarahnik
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="Inequality" |
|---|
-- NonaFarahnik - 05 Feb 2010
A few years ago, I read an Anatole France quote that challenged me: "La majestueuse égalité des lois, qui interdit au riche comme au pauvre de coucher sous les ponts." Rough translation-- "The law, in its majestic equality, makes no distinction between rich and poor; both are forbidden to sleep under the bridges [of Paris]." By defining the class that commands power as "the owners," our focus remains on the acquisition of wealth and property as the means of control. The France quote reflects the concept that the powerful class manipulates our institutional and legal structures to favor themselves. Examples in our society today abound. Is Eben's "owner" distinction too limiting? We can always have policy arguments about why we might forbid sleeping under bridges, but to what extent do our laws reflect power's goal of maintaining perpetual inequality? | | | | |
<
< | David, I think that article makes the point well. With respect to group 2- the enforcers: over the course of law school, I hope to spend time working on the issue of individual prerogative with respect to those who enforce the law. When I was a sophomore at Duke, two athletes who lived on my floor were indicted for rape. Most people know this story as the Duke Lacrosse Case. The accused were at the mercy of a police force and a prosecutor hell-bent on continuing a case with little justification. In this case, the players were able to hire top-notch counsel, the prosecutor was disbarred and North Carolina's Attorney General took the unprecedented step of declaring the accused innocent. This case and the attention it garnered was the exception. How many of the people who make up the public force can be checked for unwieldy use of the prerogative our system grants them? For those without money, what is the bulwark against this prerogative? | >
> | David, I think that article makes the point well, especially with respect to the role of those tasked with enforcing the law. On the legislative side, a close parallel would be the crack/powder cocaine sentencing disparities. With respect to the enforcers: over the course of law school, I hope to spend time working on the issue of individual prerogative in law enforcement. When I was a sophomore at Duke, two athletes who lived on my floor were indicted for rape. Most people know this story as the Duke Lacrosse Case. The accused were at the mercy of a police force and a prosecutor hell-bent on continuing a case with little justification. In this case, the players were able to hire top-notch counsel, the prosecutor was disbarred, and North Carolina's Attorney General took the unprecedented step of declaring the accused innocent. This case and the attention it garnered was the exception. How many of the people who make up the public force can be checked for unwieldy use of the prerogative our system grants them? For those without money, what is the bulwark against this prerogative? | | | -- NonaFarahnik - 07 Feb 2010
|
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |