On Mon, 10 Jan 2000 10:46:50 -0500 "Charles Brown"
<CharlesB at CNCL.ci.detroit.mi.us> writes:
>>>> "Nathan Newman" <nathan.newman at yale.edu> 01/08/00 10:47AM >>>
>I never said anything about lawyers as people, only as a profession.
>agree with you that academics probably have a higher percentage of
>and petty thugs than law. A lot of lawyers are very pleasant people--
>nature of their work, they develop good social skills and often care
>CB: My problem personally with lawyers is when they are on the other
>side of a case with you. It gets wearying to be on guard all the
>time. You have to be thinking all the time. Protecting your
>weaknesses. Attacking their weaknesses. Yet , politely. It gets crazy.
>As Nathan says some in his comment, lawyers are , obviously,
>overwhelmingly a strata which aids the ruling class in upholding the
>status quo. The small percentage of exceptions does not refute the
>validity of this generalization about lawyers as a group. Since law is
>politics, more than physicians, lawyers are involved in bad politics,
>capitalist hegemony building and legitimization of the existing law
>and order. Judges and lawyers are politicians pretending not to be
>politicians, posing as upholders of Reason.
>Post-modernists should do more deconstructing of lawyers as Age of
>Reasoners, modernists and powermongering wolves clothed in the
>discourse of reason.
In other words if I understand you correctly you are calling for a revival of legal realism, this time in order to undermine the pretentions of the legal profession to embody the ruke of Reason. Actually, Justin has in the past advocated a Marxist legal realism.
________________________________________________________________ YOU'RE PAYING TOO MUCH FOR THE INTERNET! Juno now offers FREE Internet Access! Try it today - there's no risk! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.