Sponsored Links

Featured Links

Other Topics
Sponsored Links



Quote of the Day

"What I dream of is an art of balance, of purity and serenity devoid of troubling or depressing subject matter - a soothing, calming influence on the mind, rather like a good armchair which provides relaxation from physical fatigue."

Henri Matisse

FEATURED
PRODUCTS
 
Direct Satellite PC - PC To TV Product...
 
Pc Satellite Tv Box
 
Satellite TV for PC
 
Easy TV - Get Satellite TV On Your PC
 
3000 Live TV Channels On Your PC!
 




 


Google

 
Featured Law Articles

4 Steps To Law Firm Website Search Engine Placement Improvement
Well, by now you most likely have heard that good design, proper key word density, intuitive navigation, correct Meta tags, quality incoming links and informative content are all important to achieving top search engine placement. This ...

Copyright Law and the Internet
The internet has made us all publishers and many of the copyright laws apply. The internet is not considered public domain and any original work, including photos, art and text, are protected even if there is no copyright notice.If you ...

Law and Order of the Spiritual Kind
There is no such thing as a coincidence. Albert Einstein reasoned that, “God simply does not play dice.” While we may not fully understand the reasons behind certain events, there are laws and order in the universe specifically designed ...





Anarchy: Law, Order, and Authority
 

Anarchy: Law, Order, and Authority

By Punkerslut

The Beginning

If a group of people were to live on an island, who would govern who, how, and why? If person A suspected person B of possessing a deadly weapon (if this were a crime), then how could we justify person A searching person B? Whatever reason offered for justification of search and seizure, it aso justifies person B searching person A. On this island, who would be the government? Who would rule? Whatever can justify the rule of person A can also justify the rule of person B. If one person is elected on the island, through some sort of Republic process, how is he justified in passing and enforcing laws? If an elected ruler passes a law that anyone to wear a hat is killed, would it not be equally justified for one dissident to make their own government, passing legislation that wearing hats is acceptable? A government may be defined as a person or a persons trying to enforce a rule or regulation. And if one government can be formed by one person, with legislation passed that possessing head fashion is illegal, so another one is not more wrong in making it legal. By what right would one government have the right to tell one person to do, any more than the one person would have the right to tell what the government to do? Is there anything intrinsically distinctive of either the individual or the government that allows one to control the other without restraint? If this individual opposed the state's regulation as much as the state opposed the individual's actions, how is one more justified in controlling the other? There can be no appeal to one being intrinsically right and one being intrinsically wrong: there have been just as many bad governments as there have been bad rebels. So, if a party of people lived on an island, who would govern who, and how could it possibly be justified?

Take into consideration the lack of justification for government to rule anyone on this island, as for the United States to rule anyone on this land. Just as a government on the island can oppose an individual's actions, so does our United States government oppose some of our actions, as they carry out their regulation. Use of Marijuana, a harmless practice, has been banned by the state. By what writ can the government jail Marijuana users, any more than Marijuana users can enforce their own regulation allowing Marijuana? If a police officer is justified in arresting members of society who do no harm but just commit a crime, then a citizen must be justified in arresting the government equally. There is no divine mandate given to anyone to rule, control, and kill others, be it any populace member or any government. The similarities between the hypothetical island scenario and the United States government are undeniable. The United States government has no right to rule me any more than I have a right to rule those people who make up the government. Nor ar they justified in any of their legislation, and enforcing their legislation, whether it is outlawing murder, wearing hats, or believing what you want. The government has no right to pass such laws any more than I have the right to pass such laws.

The Middle

The Republic is a type of

government where the people vote for one person to rule all. This varies from other types of governments where, more or less, a ruler maintains their power. By maintaining power, I do not mean by campaigning, but rather by an army theratening the populace. Such a ruler may be known as a dictator or a monarch. However, there are some who stipulate that a king's rule is tryanny to the rule of an elected official. What can there be, honestly, to separate the rule of a dictator and the rule of an elected official? Historically, both are prone to commit the most atrocious acts, often defending themselves with the idea that they are defending their land. Furthermore, both presidents and kings have accepted bribery and corruption. What can there be to separate a Dictatorship and a Republic? It still gives one person, out of thousands, possibly millions, it gives this one person control over the rest of the populace. And whether or not a Constitution exists in this Monarchy or Republic, kings and presidents have both trampled them to pieces in the wake of their search for power and wealth. There is one solitary difference between a dictator and a president: one is elected, one is not. The similarities between these two, though, is endless: their cruel search for power, the history of their relentlessness in eliminating enemies, they rule a population without restrain or control, save the remnants of their conscience.

The United States' administration differs from that of a Latin Dictatorship in one way: how they are chosen. The United States goes through the process of election where we choose our president, but even this failed, as the majority voted against the president who seized power. If there is any proof of corruption of power, of how a president is nothing more than a dictator, then let it be this: our current president was voted against by the people, but he rules us anyway. His laws control our bodies, even though we did not choose him. George W. Bush is not in power because he was elected. He is in power because of his army, because of his secret, underground spy network which keeps tabs on +300 million American suspects. The difference between a Republic and a Dictatorship is election, but both governments give unfair power to one person to rule all people, and both are productive of heartless, cruel atrocities.

The Ending

By what right does a police officer have to detain me, anymore than I have the right to detain the police officer? How isa president more qualified to rule a populace than a dictator? Why is it so impossible to imagine a society that rules itself, with Direct Democracy, and no leaders or police officers?

www.punkerslut.com

For Life, Punkerslut
About the Author

Punkerslut (or Andy Carloff) has been writing essays and poetry on social issues which have caught his attention for several years. His website www.punkerslut.com provides a complete list of all of these writings. His life experience includes homelessness, squating in New Orleans and LA, dropping out of high school, getting expelled from college for "subversive activities," and a myriad of other revolutionary actions.

Written by: Punkerslut



Law News



Globe and Mail

Emergency law, celebrity support giving oxygen to Quebec protesters
Globe and Mail
Quebec's emergency law aimed at reining in protest marches and restoring social peace failed to stop outbursts of violence during its first test over the weekend, while the months-long student movement gained some big-name support on the global stage.
Quebec Protests Gain High Profile SupportABC News

all 117 news articles »

Patriot-News

Study: 2000 convicted then exonerated in 23 years
CBS News
The new national registry, or database, painstakingly assembled by the University of Michigan Law School and the Center on Wrongful Convictions at Northwestern University School of Law, is the most complete list of exonerations ever compiled.
University of Michigan Law School and the Center on Wrongful Convictions at ...Patriot-News

all 264 news articles »

NEWS.com.au

Florida's '10-20-Life' laws empower prosecutors, handcuff judges, juries ...
Florida Times-Union
Florida Coastal School of Law Professor Rod Sullivan said the statutes were intended to apply to a rash of repeat violent offenders that the state faced when the laws were constructed. His biggest criticisms are that they don't take into account those ...
Woman gets 20 years for firing warning shotPhiladelphia Inquirer
Law tears family apart over a single gunshotNEWS.com.au
Wife gets 20 years jail for warning shot that hurt no-oneSydney Morning Herald
Albuquerque Journal (subscription)
all 256 news articles »

Using untested law poses risks for prosecutors
Chicago Tribune
As the NATO bomb-making probe intensified over the weekend, Cook County State's Attorney Anita Alvarez continued to push a bold — and unprecedented — strategy to hold the suspects accountable under the state's obscure anti-terrorism law.

and more »

abc40

Loophole benefits drunk drivers
Boston.com
Attorney General Martha Coakley and members of the Legislature are seeking to close a loophole in a drunken-driving law that allows some drivers who are prosecuted for drunken driving to avoid some of the sanctions the law was written to impose.
Tarr, allies target Melanie's Law loopholeGloucester Daily Times
Mass. officials propose drunken driving law changeBoston Herald
Mass. Officials Hope To Close Loophole In Drunk Driving LawCBS Local
Patch.com
all 27 news articles »