Justice

There’s not much that has stuck with me from a course in Political Theory I once had to take (it was a requirement for getting my B.A. in History at the University of London). But one thing I remember was that it began with Plato and his book The Republic, which was all about an attempt to define Justice.

And the main conclusion Plato came to was that, in an ideal society, everybody would get what they deserved. From our point of view, a couple of millennia later, that may seem, after all those pages and dialogues, to have been rather obvious, and one is tempted to say to Plato, “Is that all?”

But the big question remains; Who is to decide what is Deserved, and by Whom? That, of course, is why we still have to deal with laws and lawyers and courts and judges – and sometimes even juries – just as Plato did.

I have never had the privilege of being on a jury – although I tried my best to get on one. The trouble is that deciding who gets on the jury is not made by any impartial judge, but by the opposing lawyers, each of whom gets to interview and approve or veto each jury candidate. I think they may be limited to how many rejections they may make. Still, with twelve people to select, this process can, and often does, take days.

Nevertheless, once the jury is chosen, and they have sat through the entire case, (which they are not supposed to discuss with any outsider) they are isolated in a special “Jury Room” to make what should be a unanimous decision. Anyone who has seen the movie Twelve Angry Men will have a little insight into the problems which can arise from clashes of personalities in such a situation. But, going back to the Middle Ages, this is how hundreds of legal cases have been settled over the centuries, at least in England, whose legal system was long considered a model for other countries.

Indeed, it was that system which was transplanted into the American Colonies, and became cornerstone of the jurisprudence which today governs the United States.

And where does Justice come into all this? The word is certainly there, both in the Declaration of Independence and in the U.S. Constitution. And we can find it many times throughout the Biblical Old and New Testaments. The trouble is that it has meant many different things to different people at different times.

If English has a better word for it, it may be “RIGHT” – which may be one way of drawing a distinction between the way things are, and the way they should be.

Unfortunately, “Right” has its own can of worms, since it entangles us in concepts of entitlement.

But there is also a U.S. Pledge of Allegiance, which children are taught in school to recite. It not only promises loyalty, but attempts to describe the essential characteristics of the country to which loyalty is being pledged. One oath-stopper is the phrase “One nation, indivisible.” I’m not sure just when this Pledge was written, or became in any way mandatory – but I will bet you that it was some time after the American Civil War, which, of course, was mainly fought over that very issue – i.e. whether what had been recognized internationally as a single nation could divide itself and become two separate nations. Of course, the issue of Slavery entered into it, but was not essential to the indivisibility. Other countries, even the “Mother Nation” of England, have had their own civil wars. In the English Civil War, the big issue was the Rights of the King.

But our American Pledge, after specifying indivisibility, goes on to promise “Liberty and Justice for All.” That is a pretty big mouthful, requiring three
large swallows.

Aren’t Liberty and Justice in some ways contradictory concepts? If everybody got Justice, how could we guarantee universal Liberty? Surely some people deserve to be locked up, for the just protection of others.

It’s that “for all” which seems to me to be the big stumbling block. Surely even Plato, in his very small Athenian state, would recognize the big differences between people, making it necessary for different people to be handled in different ways.

Some relevant Thoughts:

“By the time justice is done, injustice has often done everything it wanted to do.” 

“If more people received justice in this world, there’d be less need to believe in another one.”