andie nachgeborenen wrote:
>
> And yet. And yet. There's a reason that world legal
> systems have come to seem parallel at a sort of medium
> distance -- once you get beyond the idea of trial by
> battle or ordeal, there are a comparatively limited
> set of broad paths you can take given the requirements
> of moderately efficient dispute resolution in large
> and complex societies.
Leftists and left-liberals grew too complacent from (say) 1955-75) about dependence on the court system. Essentially we can't depend on anything that we do not continually confirm and reconfirm through various forms of direct action. Free speech for high-school students has to depend on student activism, not courts. If students cause enough trouble, even a Bush-appointed court will eventually go along with them. Same with police brutality: it will only be stopped by the courts when it causes more social disruption than the cops can handle.
Carrol