On Sun, 30 Apr 2006, Wendy Lyon wrote:
> On 4/30/06, Miles Jackson <cqmv at pdx.edu> wrote:
>>
>> --Just as you feel justified if a Mafia guy clips a rapist, an
>> anti-abortion nut is going to feel justified if the Mafia guy clips an
>> abortion doctor. Are you sure you wanna go there? Or are you reserving
>> the right to ignore the rule of law for people who are disgusted by the
>> same things you are?
>
> I think John Thornton capably pointed out the flaw in this analogy,
> and as someone else noted, this is a TV show we've been talking about.
There is no flaw in the analogy: in each case, the person claims a right to disregard the law on the basis of their own beliefs. (Analogues do not have to be identical in every aspect!) And as with most pop culture, TV can bring up serious political and morals issues. "It's TV" is a reason to more carefully analyze that form of culture, not trivialize it.
> Again (because I have a feeling this is going to be misinterpreted) I
> am NOT saying "yay for vigilantism" - just that where it exists, it
> isn't much use trying to counter it with lofty statements about
> "disregard for the rule of law" - which would pretty much get you
> laughed out of council estates in West Belfast or Dublin's North Inner
> City. It has to be addressed by a FULL and HONEST appraisal, taking
> into account the realistic and probable alternatives and not just the
> alternatives that exist in an ideal world.
I agree that there are contexts in which principled rejection of the rule of existing laws is necessary and justifiable. However, the goal of that political action should be the creation of a system of social rules/law that more effectively represents the ideals and beliefs of the community.
Miles