Dear Friends,
It seems to me, that “some are more equal than others” (under the law) isn’t only a communist philosophy, but the core philosophy of all elitist ideologies. Aristocracy, oligarchy, socialism, communism, corporatism, fascism… despotism of all breeds hold that the elite are more equal. Only under pure free enterprise are all equal under law. That’s why it doesn’t exist and never will. The elite detest capitalism. It lowers them to the common lot. But, people get rich under capitalism, and the rich have an advantage in court! Which is true. Pareto can’t be denied. Wealth however, when distributed by merit alone, proves a system’s equality under the law. Courts are always corrupt. Elitist systems seek to distribute wealth by political favor instead of merit. To everyone’s disadvantage.
Millions of things are distributed on a Pareto curve. The math is simple but has deep implications. Pareto theorized, 20% of sewer pipes do 80% of the work, in a wastewater system. That curve then applied to electrical grids, highways and musical talent. Moreover, if 20% of a group does 80% of the work, then 20% of the 20% does 80% of that work. Meaning 10% does 64% of the work, has talent… or earns money. The scale then becomes logarithmic. Leaving the square root of the multitude producing 50% of that thing. That’s how 1% end up controlling 90% of the wealth, singing the top songs or write the best books. Under any system. Except communism… where 1 man controls 100% of the wealth. Which I think we can all agree is far more unequal.
Elitists and their ideologies adore unequal treatment under the law. That some are more equal than others is built into the very fabric of every legal system that has ever existed. Think the US is different? Ask any lawyer this question, “Is there any time you know you’ll win in court?” (If they’re honest) Their answer will be, “When I’m facing a pro se litigant.” In other words, the facts, law and justice are irrelevant… the only thing that counts in court is political favor. Defend yourself, and the judge has every incentive to rule against you, and none to rule fairly. Because a judge is an attorney, thus has a monetary interest in enriching lawyers, and so himself. Add to that only the rich can afford good lawyers, and every legal system proves, some are more equal than others.
How about pseudo capitalist legal systems then? Why yes, they’re just as skewed to the powerful and wealthy as all others. Unless they provide free lawyers to everyone without favor. Socializing the legal system. No system does that. The elite would never allow it to exist. It would eliminate their legal privilege. The US provides “free” lawyers to poor people, but those free lawyers aren’t even worth the money the defendant pays for them. Often over worked they don’t have time to defend anyone, low pay gives low incentive, and often they could care less about their clients. Since the state pays the bill, they work for the state, not the defendant. Moreover, if a rich person sues a poor person, no where is the poor person given an attorney, they have to defend themselves pro se. Therefore they lose.
Then there’s the inherent advantage of political favor above and beyond that of the lawyer. A defendant with huge political favor is unconvictable. Even as one with huge negative political favor, cant win, with video proving him innocent. This factor in and of itself shows legal systems are failures at justice. Because they epitomize the adage, some are more equal than others, under the law. The difference between the past and today is, we see it now, in vivid color. The elite have used the Pareto curve to justify their usurpations. To make everyone economically “equal.” By making some more equal under the law. The courts are inherently biased to the wealthy and politically favored… and always will be. So what’s the answer? Fight to limit the power, role and scope of the government, and especially, the law.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
