A question of justice

In Book II of Plato's Republic, Glaucon and Adiemantus challenge Socrates to defend Justice as an end in itself. They make two claims. No one would be just if they were not coerced. It is better to appear just, but be unjust.

The question of justice is related to questions about obeying the law. Everyone knows they can get into trouble if they disobey the law with impunity. Coercion is definitely part of the deal. However, some claim that it is unfair to others if people disobey the laws. Fairness might be the ultimate rationale for obeying the laws, but we are still left with questions about fairness and justice itself.

The President of the United States can just do stuff and worry about the legality of what he is doing later if someone calls him out on it. Glaucon and Adiemantus may have had it exactly right. It is better to be to be unjust especially if you can make yourself appear otherwise.

One of the nifty things I picked up at the Supreme Court bookstore in September of 1998 was a pocket edition of the Constitution. I like reading Constitutions and trying to make sense of political events in terms of how words and deeds often differ.

I find it very difficult to find any section in the Second Article that would excuse the President from violating existing legal statutes related to searches and seizures. Amendment IV seems rather explicit about the requirement for warrants and probable cause when conducting searches and seizures.

Let's hypothesize that a President wants to conduct illegal searches and seizures. We could appeal to his sense of fairness and justice. That might work. Socrates explain to us once again how justice is a virtue and an end in itself. Explain to us how no one ever willingly commits unjust acts if they know what justice is.

Or we could coerce him. We could impeach him and get him out of office. That assumes there is a legislative body with the backbone to get the ball rolling.

The situation might further be exacerbated when there is a prevailing culture of corruption, cronyism, and incompetence that includes all political parties and branches of government. Then what should the concerned citizen do? In my nifty little pamphlet containing the Constitution there is a copy of the Declaration of Independence. That document talks about revolution.

Revolution is disobeying the laws. It might be unfair and unjust to others to start a revolution. But what if the everybody is being unjust and the Constitution is merely a piece of paper for fools who do not know how to protect their rights? If I don’t protect my rights, who will do it for me? Certainly not a corrupt government.