Dear Friends,
It seems to me, the faction that incessantly claims, no one is above the law, constantly put themselves and their political allies above the law. Let’s examine the people the democrats have put above the law. Big pharma is given a pass on vaccines, even for safety violations. Violations that would destroy a barbershop. Holding big pharma above the law. Then there are illegal aliens, who the democrats have firmly placed above the law. Even today as Trump is cracking down, the faction that claims no one is above the law… elevates illegal aliens above the law. Who could forget the preemptive blanket pardons. They put everyone who was pardoned without charge above the law. Apparently, the faction that asserts, no one is above the law, hold themselves above the law. Making them hypocrites.
What’s the purpose of law? Is it to enrich the powerful, as Thrasymachus said? Do we have laws so the experts can run the world from an ivory tower? Maybe instead, we have laws to control the negative aspects of human behavior… rather than enhancing and empowering avarice, envy, wrath and opulence? By giving some too much power. This is a fundamental question that has been asked since before the ancient Greeks postulated about them. The Mesopotamian Marduk story is a more ancient example. In that, the gods that killed their father and lived on his corpse, were abusing their power for their self interest. Tiamat, the god of chaos arose to seek revenge, and Marduk, the all seeing god, saved the intransigent gods from her wrath. Showing that chaos is the result of Thrasymachus’ philosophy of law.
If we then agree that law is a means to control the negative aspects of human behavior, then which negative aspects, and how strictly should we suppress them? The totalitarian philosophy seeks to regulate all aspects of human existence. Totalitarians being so much smarter, wiser and moral than the rest of us, it’s their burden. Even as anarchy doesn’t control any negative aspect of human behavior so results in despotism. As strong men amass power in the form of gangs. Moreover, the more regulatory power invested in government, the more likely it will be abused to serve itself, rather than society. Becoming the acme of Thrasymachus’ vision. So we can conclude that the regulatory power to limit negative human behavior, must be limited, else it empowers negative aspects of human behavior.
So we have to reckon that government itself must be limited. Otherwise it risks empowering the very negative aspects of human behavior, law is supposed to limit. If this is the case, then we have to decide what negative aspects are so bad they warrant limitation by law? Historically, murder, theft and violence to a person have been considered, by all societies, to deserve to be illegal. The uniting aspect of these agreed upon crimes is their destabilization effect. Murder being the most destabilizing. They destabilize society, the economy and the peace. Applying the big three we see that all societies have punished destabilizing murder more severely. So we can conclude, if we want prosperity, peace and stability, behaviors that destabilize society the most should be the most punished.
The law exists to limit negative aspects of human behavior. Especially behavior that results in death. The more deaths the more destabilizing the crime. The more destabilizing the more punishable. So why would some be allowed to be above the law? Especially if their crimes resulted in the deaths of millions worldwide and the destabilization of the planet itself? As were Fauci’s crimes. What good would be triggered by elevating such destabilizing people above the law… even as those doing it claim, no one is above the law? Their actions disagree with their rhetoric. Which is the definition of hypocrisy. By placing themselves and their allies above the law, while applying its full force to their enemies, the democrats destabilize society, using law to its opposite. Making them the true heirs of Thrasymachus.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
