Unnatural Law...
Legal remedies are poorly suited for rectifying social injustice because of its focus on individual agents. This fragments and hinders its use as a tool in this case because of its inadequacies in identifying social problems, and then in providing proactive solutions.
By focusing on individuals as the subjects of social wrongs or rights, legal systems only find determinate judgments on willful harms. It obscures the possibility of passing judgment on social norms or broad developments in a social reality. The idea of a ‘deliberate’ act implies that there is a norm of action, something subconsciously carried out, and a separate mode of thinking that becomes deliberate. Only focusing on the ‘deliberate’ mode means the subconscious or unspoken gets obscured as a subject of analysis. Also, the standard of deliberateness that requires knowledge of a harm being inflicted gets away from the main point of the social harm itself, which should be the focus as much as the means by which it emerges. Even if a harm is not deliberate, struggle should occur to overcome it regardless.
Second, focusing on individuals makes rectifying injustice difficult. The formulation of problems of course impacts their solutions, and so all of the problems identified above remain relevant. The formulation of judgment on an individual linked to the idea of ‘deliberateness’ also narrows focus down to individual acts. In a situation of systemic abuse, this makes restitution difficult, as individual instances of abuse attain their full meaning only in concert with many other acts. Also, it poorly describes the ways that problems emerge: over time, and with building force. Achieving restitution only comes for an individual act, rather than a social reality and its impact.
Duncan
By focusing on individuals as the subjects of social wrongs or rights, legal systems only find determinate judgments on willful harms. It obscures the possibility of passing judgment on social norms or broad developments in a social reality. The idea of a ‘deliberate’ act implies that there is a norm of action, something subconsciously carried out, and a separate mode of thinking that becomes deliberate. Only focusing on the ‘deliberate’ mode means the subconscious or unspoken gets obscured as a subject of analysis. Also, the standard of deliberateness that requires knowledge of a harm being inflicted gets away from the main point of the social harm itself, which should be the focus as much as the means by which it emerges. Even if a harm is not deliberate, struggle should occur to overcome it regardless.
Second, focusing on individuals makes rectifying injustice difficult. The formulation of problems of course impacts their solutions, and so all of the problems identified above remain relevant. The formulation of judgment on an individual linked to the idea of ‘deliberateness’ also narrows focus down to individual acts. In a situation of systemic abuse, this makes restitution difficult, as individual instances of abuse attain their full meaning only in concert with many other acts. Also, it poorly describes the ways that problems emerge: over time, and with building force. Achieving restitution only comes for an individual act, rather than a social reality and its impact.
Duncan
posted by Duncan at 11:57 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home