nettime's_clerk on Thu, 6 Sep 2001 23:32:22 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> lawyers, guns, and money digest [skoric vs. frodeaux] |
Re: <nettime> It's the law!-Or is it the money? "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net> FrodeauxB@aol.com "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net> FrodeauxB@aol.com "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net> FrodeauxB@aol.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From: "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net> Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 13:42:32 -0400 Subject: Re: <nettime> It's the law!-Or is it the money? Both Bushes - H & W were at Yale law school, I believe. I don't know whether the junior graduated, though, or got his degree 'honorably'. I agree that there is the 'man behind the curtain' and that 'lawyers' are just 'devil advocates'. The situation is, however, that the 'man behind the curtain' is, obviously, elusive. He tricks us into believing that he does not exist. Pleads fifth amandement (in the U.S.) or article six (in Ireland) or whatever - while he pushes his advocates to the front line. I basically wanted to draw a parallel between the now defunct Eastern bloc communist system (example: Yugoslavia) and the very much alive Western bloc capitalist one (example: USA). My feeling is that lawyers in the later system serve the same role of being the connective tissue of the system, that the communist party members were in the former system. I don't think that lawyers per se are bad people because of that. Some of them are actually very good people and my very good friends - just as in former Yugoslavia there were members of the communist party that were honest, intelligent, hardworking and humorous, that wanted to make things better for everybody. They failed, though. And the 'man behind the curtain' had the best of them. And now many of the people in former Yugoslavia, particularly in Serbia, are blaming the 'man behind the curtain', or, rather, the 'ogre from the tunnel' (Blagojevic's film "Pretty Villages, Pretty Flames") for their ill-fortune. But the man is so elusive - because he lives inside us. Inside each one of us - lawyers and/or party members just have more responsibility how they will respond to his urges, because their collective actions can affect the given societies much more than actions of the rest of us. Best Regards, ivo Ivo Skoric 1773 Lexington Ave New York NY 10029 212.369.9197 ivo@balkansnet.org http://balkansnet.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From: FrodeauxB@aol.com Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 14:29:25 EDT Subject: Re: <nettime> It's the law!-Or is it the money? Yes, it is the person, not a profession, which matters. I am most sensitive to generalizations about any group, as I am sure you are. It seems to me, however, that the only "political incorrectness" we tolerate is that aimed at lawyers. It is an honorable profession, as are many. Some practitioners do not treat it as such. I must also wonder if your analogy is fair. Of course, you have had the benefit (?) of knowing both systems, so I am sure it is not incorrect, especially for those who serve themselves and not all of us. Sincerely, David - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From: "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net> Date: Tue, 4 Sep 2001 16:02:20 -0400 Subject: Re: <nettime> It's the law!-Or is it the money? My impression, living in the U.S. is that while lawyers are a profession, they as a group became more of an establishment here. Kind of like the party or the priests once were, a spice without which you can't make any corporate dish any more. That of course doesn't mean that all of them are bad or crooked - but I see an inherent danger in making the entire society so dependent on one particular approach. I am not a fan of aristocracy even if it is merit based. ivo - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From: FrodeauxB@aol.com Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 08:38:57 EDT Subject: Re: <nettime> It's the law!-Or is it the money? Ivo, Well, for what it is worth, the rule of law does seem to protect a lot of folks in a lot of ways. It is subject to manipulation, but it is the best thing going thus far. There are simply some folks who, if they are touched, they aren't reached. Read Democracy in America, particularly the section on the law and attorneys. I am still idealistic and hopeful, so I go to work every day dedicated to my principles and optimistic about this existence. I enjoy reading critiques like yours, if for no other reason that they make me sit down and think through what I believe. As a Franciscan priest once told me, "Cherish the heretics; they test our faith which we often take for granted." He also told me to never let anyone or anything come between me and God-especially not a priest. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From: "Ivo Skoric" <ivo@reporters.net> Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 15:15:20 -0400 Subject: Re: <nettime> It's the law!-Or is it the money? "It is the best thing going thus far" was never good enough reason for me to be idealistic and hopeful about any particular "thing." Particularly because this is how many people defended self- management in Yugoslav socialist system. And I always scorned Leibnitz and others belonging to the 'positivist' phylosophical concept. I guess, when somebody becomes a 'dissident' before reaching US legal drinking age, then he is cursed to be a heretic for the rest of his life, questioning validity of every belief and practice. The general purpose of the rule of law is to protect, I agree. But to protect whom or what, that's the question I beg to ask. How would the state of lawlessness look like? Where nothing and nobody would be protected and everybody could do whatever he wanted, did you ever thing how would that look like? When I think about that, I always start with myself: what would I do? Given that there is no laws and no police, the rule of power should prevail, the common sense of our education and upbringing would suggest. I could, given that I am young and athletic, go around and beat up weaker individuals and take what they claim to be their property. I could kill them if I chose so. Also, I could be beaten up and killed by some gang paid by somebody who has more material resources at his/hers disposal. Therefore, it would be benefitial for me to accept the beneficial side of the compromise that the rule of law offers and demands from its adherents. However, I don't think in those terms. I do not have an ambition to beat other people, to take their possessions or to kill them. I just want to live, have fun and let others live and have fun. I put my relations with the nature, the world and the other people in more cooperative and less competitive terms. And I don't need a law for that. I can manage my relations with others without the written law. I am not afraid of others, nor do I threaten anybody. And I could defend myself to a certain point, after which I am ready to accept the risk of losing my life for the price of greater liberty. That's precisely what endeared the American system (as advertised by Hollywood, of course) to me, despite my grandmother's nagging that the U.S. is 'unsafe' to live in. I am actually quite disappointed with the U.S. and the proliferation of restrictions. What is the purpose of legislation that majority of population disobey (like the drinking age and the speed limit, for example)? Freedom entails risks. Risks require courage. That's what 'land of the free, home of the brave' slogan suggests. Excessive legislation curtails freedom, in order to diminish risks. The intrinsic risk-aversive quality of the 'rule of law' not only lowers the need for individual courage, but also perceives individual courage with suspicion and annoyance. Therefore, 'rule of law' as practiced today may be inherently dangerous to the lambasted ideals of Democracy in America. There is that great song of the old- school British punk band The Clash with lyrics that go like: "I am so bored with the U S A ..." ivo Ivo Skoric 1773 Lexington Ave New York NY 10029 212.369.9197 ivo@balkansnet.org http://balkansnet.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - From: FrodeauxB@aol.com Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2001 18:17:57 EDT Subject: Re: <nettime> It's the law!-Or is it the money? When one traffics in the idealistic, one is outside the mainstream. The facts of the matter is that relative few believe as you do, and even fewer act that way. It is not that simple. To speculate that you would act in a life threatening situation in a way which is not self defensive and driven by the instinct to survive is just that-speculation. To aspire is necessary-to be practical is another. Even now you, I, we, aren't acting so idealistic. The key is not to spend the energy speculating or criticizing. The key is to act within the framework to change the framework. If one desires to bring about meaningful change, one does so by acting the way one believes, and not by critiquing others. Honestly, this bit about the drinking age and speed limits suppressing freedom is silly. These are not the issues nor do I believe they are even a microcosm of the issues. They are diversions, nothing more. What you seek is license, not freedom. I guess we must agree to disagree. Here is the issue: Now, if I may paraphrase what you're generally saying, the bourgeois mock-heroic shenanigans, as you call them, of bored rich men floating around the world in hot air balloons, of our extreme interest in extreme sports, our obsession with face-lifted, liposucked, and tummy-tucked celebrities of mediocre talent, our deranged focus on the sexual peccadilloes of elected leaders, are all examples of the funneling of our will to power into trivial pursuits and away from genuine heroism, exemplified by the likes of Julius Caesar, Napoleon, and Fred Nietzsche. Oprah/Nietzsche (James M. Crotty) http://www.disinfo.com/pages/article/id1548/pg1/ Sincerely, David A. Hamilton Attorney at Law P. O. Box 44202 Baton Rouge, LA 70804 Telephone: 225/387-4982 Fax: 225/346-6360 email: FrodeauxB@aol.com - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net