Monday, October 10, 2016

Majority Rule?

When a rapist gets raped in prison, nobody sheds a tear. As a matter of fact, such rape is commonly perceived as a kind of “poetic” or “rough” justice. But, if raping a rapist can be perceived as justice, then how can rape be condemned at all?

If rape is “okay” in any circumstance, then it can be argued that it is “okay” in every circumstance. For example, if it is okay to rape a man who has raped, then it must also be okay to rape the man who rapes a man who has raped. And if you argue that it is only okay to rape a man who has raped an “innocent” victim, then rapists everywhere will rejoice in their claim that their victims were all “sluts” who deserved to be raped, as incidentally – and not coincidentally – many rapists, if not most, already do!

And as these arguments fail, only one justification for rape as a form of justice remains. And that is by some “majority” or “consensus”; i.e. the “will of the people”. And this in fact ends up being the sole justification in most “Western” societies for all forms of justice, from municipal to capital punishment; and, by majority rule, rape as well (when the victim is judged guilty by popular consensus).

But, if the majority rules, then what did Germany do “wrong” in the 30s and early 40s? And what did “the South” do “wrong” before the American Civil War? What about the Mongol Hordes in the 13th century? Or even ISIS in the 21st? All of these groups maintained a majority rule within their own ranks. So, if majority rule determines justice, then all the extreme forms of eugenics, slavery, barbarism and religious intolerance, can be rightly declared as legitimate forms of justice! And if these can be seen as just and fair, then why not child rape?

Sadly, as if to mark my point, history has indeed seen child rape ruled “fair and just” by a majority rule in even the most unexpected social consensus, such as in traditional Jewish Law. So my point seems not only arguable, but repeatedly proven by historical precedence. And my point is only this: majority rule does not, and never has, justified rape, or murder, or imprisonment, or even parking fines. Majority rule justifies nothing. And even if it did, then am I not the “majority” when I'm the only one in a room with a gun? Or when me and my friends are the strongest gang in town? Isn't that precisely all any government authority really is? The biggest and strongest “majority” in town?

Of course I'm not presenting anything new here. This is all one of the oldest antiestablishment arguments there is. But, I raise it only because I believe in real justice. Not “higher” justice (that's just another form of majority rule), but “natural” justice, and true justice! And it is this belief that keeps me hanging on, and keeps me blogging. And it was this belief that also caused me to stop raping, and killing, and to stop believing in majority rule, not even my own.

[J.D. September 30, 2016]

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.