>>So what is justice? I would think it would have to be a set
>>of rules of conduct to which all were subject. . . . .>
>>But then you have to apply the rules to _everybody_, including
>>people like Clinton and Albright and the Bushes . . . .
>
>That's a goal to aspire to, but consider a humbler analogy. Our criminal
>justice system in this country is racist and unfair. But does that mean we
>shouldn't want murderers, thieves, and fraudsters caught and punished,
>just because the big fish get away? "Oh, that's all right Mr. Gacy, go
>right ahead; it would unfair to stop you as long as Henry Kissinger's free"?
I think there are two problems with this analogy: 1) The question is not about bad, better or good implementation of some existing state of justice. The question was: Should the anti-war movement *campaign* for "bringing the perpetrators to justice" - and it was rightly pointed out that if the word "justice" was to be used in connection with such a campaign then "justice" had to apply to all (or if we want to be "humble": a representative selection of) "perpetrators".
2) The other problem is that it gives the impression that even if we can't get the Kissingers, the Bushes etc., the world would be a little bit more "just" if we get the bin Ladens, the Milosevics, the Saddam Husseins etc. I have very little respect for any of these gentlemen, but as far as I can see the only effect of such action would be to give US imperialism fewer sleepless nights.
I think using terms like "justice" in connection with campaigns against violent solutions to real world social problems is a blind alley. I think the anti-war movement would fool itself, if it thinks it is a shortcut to wider support to accept such analogy - and at best a waste of time to campaign for it.
Most people do know that society is unjust. The movements against neoliberalism and capitalist globalisation has helped very much to generalize this to the international scene.
I think the best way forward is to point out that the real problem behind the Sept 11 attack is poverty and global unequality, and that the US and European governments should do someting about this, if they mean anything by "countering terrorism". Their war is an attempt to maintain that poverty and inequality, and it will not only create more terrorism - it *is* terrorism.
Yours, Jorn
-- Jørn Andersen Ærtevej 21, st. th., 2700 Brønshøj Tlf. +45-38816766 Mobil: +45-40300210 E-mail: jorn.andersen at vip.cybercity.dk --------------------