From: utzoo!decvax!harpo!eagle!mhtsa!alice!npoiv!houxm!hogpc!houti!trc
Newsgroups: net.politics
Title: A just legal system - possible?
Article-I.D.: houti.262
Posted: Fri Apr 22 17:36:35 1983
Received: Mon Apr 25 19:22:54 1983



Response to Guy Harris:

Non-trivial situations are those in which the company feels it
has a lot to gain by coercion.  This will almost always involve 
large numbers of employees, or set a precedent that threatens them.
Thus, my second comment on the forming of unions answers the question
"What about non-trivial situations?"

Your comment about the truly coercive actions in the 30's is true,
but has doesnt contradict my stance, which is that there is no such
animal as economic coercion.

I believe that a just legal system is not impossible or impractical.
We have come fairly close in the US, by originally setting ourselves
up as a republic - a government of laws, not just of Man.  This 
concept has been more or less adhered to, though of late judges seem
to be taking a lot on themselves.

It is not necessary to live in the best of all possible worlds in order
to get a just legal system.  In fact there would be no need for a legal
system in such a world!  I dont think that a system has to always come
to the absolutely correct decision in order to be just - it merely has 
to make the correct decision based upon the evidence available.

And as to the difficulty of arriving at a world in which a just legal
system is possible, it is generally true that people get just about
the type of system that they deserve, in the long run.  If they are
strong and demand their rights boldly, they will get a just system.
If they are weak and demand that the system protect them, they will
get a system that takes over their lives.  We seem to be getting the
latter now.

	Tom Craver
	houti!trc