Jump to content

Justice and Politics Against Democracy


jaywalker

Recommended Posts

I think it would be improper to comment on an ongoing court case, and I've read convincing arguments by academics that take both sides of the Government's appeal; so have no idea what the members of the Supreme Court will decide.


However, I think there is a more interesting general issue. There is quite a lot of comment (not least on TV) that the whole 'Justice' thing is just a distraction, that a democratic choice has been made. There is also a clamour for the executive to implement that choice without further ado - in particular, that Parliament would simply get in the way of the necessary negotiations.


This seems to me to be a fundamental misrecognition of how we thwart power. We know full well that power will take unto itself all means if allowed. It will tend to concentrate itself in few hands. There will be a certainty in its execution - on the claim that "we know" this is the good for all. Embodying 'the people', this has no limits (you do not after all need to look very far to see exemplars of this).


How we have at least to some extent prevented this (for sure, inadequately) has been by insisting on autonomy not heteronomy. The Times today calls for heteronomy, like the other populist tabloids. The commentators invited to pontificate by the BBC last night all called for the same. The people's voice must not be gainsaid - that is democracy.


A very stupid, infantile, notion of democracy. But then we should be against it. The urgency is to re-establish a notion of autonomy. In all walks of life. Not anarchic: rather, based on a notion of the state that requires the individuated voices of the rule of law and the expression of dissensus (politics through parliament, a media uncontrolled by populism or government). This recognises that each should hold the other to account; but on powers constituted in advance: justice interprets the law, parliament establishes it, the police enforce it (not something else), and the media interrogates it. Just as we should strive against heteronomy in the ethics of our own lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ianr Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> > I think it would be improper to comment on an

> ongoing court case,

>

> Why?


For the same reason I gave in my post. This must be true of the necessary relative-autonomy of any court case: that they exercise judicial reason not common reason (the autonomy is relative because constrained by the assigned power to act only in a constitutional way as a matter of law). They express this as "impartiality" - but of course, it is really a partiality of a right to interpret the law as-such. That right's autonomy is what I argued for.


What could I say about that from outside the court? I can argue about the terms of that power: but not the particularism of a case.


I do not think this greatly matters - the Supreme Court is currently quite robust. But the principle seems to me worth upholding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Don't forget the people voted for a government

> that promised a referendum...


"the people" was the target of my post. I can only apologise for not making that clear. For you that may be a good - for me it is not.


Then you will accuse me of being anti-democratic. On the basis that democracy = the people I am certainly anti-democratic. This is why I opposed such an idea with the necessity of autonomy in the judiciary, media, and parliament within the powers constituting the state - as an antidote to that monstrosity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Don't forget the people voted for a government

> that promised a referendum...



And?


And they voted for a government that delivered a referendum, but little else


Hence we're up shit creek somewhat. So let's not go down the 'the people have voted' route, coz like really, most people haven't considered the options, and in this case 'options' really matter.


I'm fed up with this 'dare defy the will of the people ' bullshit that the May government are putting out. We (that's you too) need the best deal possible. And some of that deal will hurt your ideal of Island life.


But get over it, because we are less than exited by the stupidity of populism and the cark of 'taking control'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And how do you know that 'the deal' we have got at the moment is any good? We are being shafted by 750 extra politicians who cost us ?63 million a week- whose annual audit has never been ratified. the current 'deal' is NOT helping the poorer and uneducated - even the Archbishop of Canterbury has said as much- before Theresa May said so.....some of you are extremely verbose and I guess you have had an excellent education but you have no idea what the dispossessed are suffering- especially as they watch their kids sink into a life of drugs or petty crime....
Link to comment
Share on other sites

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> And how do you know that 'the deal' we have got at

> the moment is any good? We are being shafted by

> 750 extra politicians who cost us ?63 million a

> week- whose annual audit has never been ratified.

> the current 'deal' is NOT helping the poorer and

> uneducated - even the Archbishop of Canterbury has

> said as much- before Theresa May said so.....some

> of you are extremely verbose and I guess you have

> had an excellent education but you have no idea

> what the dispossessed are suffering- especially as

> they watch their kids sink into a life of drugs or

> petty crime....


There's more opportunities than ever before.


Brexit in my opinion will take away opportunities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> And how do you know that 'the deal' we have got at

> the moment is any good? We are being shafted by

> 750 extra politicians who cost us ?63 million a

> week- whose annual audit has never been ratified.

> the current 'deal' is NOT helping the poorer and

> uneducated - even the Archbishop of Canterbury has

> said as much- before Theresa May said so.....some

> of you are extremely verbose and I guess you have

> had an excellent education but you have no idea

> what the dispossessed are suffering- especially as

> they watch their kids sink into a life of drugs or

> petty crime...


What you say is true. I have no idea what the dispossessed are suffering.


However, I did not post this thread as for or against Brexit. I wanted to argue for the (relative) autonomy of the judicial system (and of parliament, the media, education, the police, and the other institutions of the state). That autonomy is currently threatened in many ways, not least in the outrage expressed at the fact that this judicial review is taking place.


But you are right in that the basically Hegelian point I made in the post is only one step (the second, necessary one was initiated particularly by Althusser). That is, the state apparatuses in their relative autonomy tend to social reproduction - they stabilise an existing pattern of privilege by validating the identities formed there, so deny the dispossessed a chance.


That is as true of the judicial system (who is locked up and for what) as the education system (who is recognised as 'intelligent', and can then self-recognise as intelligent to self-justify their privilege: a certain 'verbosity' here helps cloud the process).


But dealing with that is not an argument against relative autonomy because without autonomy there is no basis for antagonistic democratic debate (i.e. against social reproduction) there is only a collapse to a general will unchecked - i.e. dictatorship (however 'popular').

Link to comment
Share on other sites

uncleglen Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> And how do you know that 'the deal' we have got at

> the moment is any good? We are being shafted by

> 750 extra politicians who cost us ?63 million a

> week- whose annual audit has never been ratified.

> the current 'deal' is NOT helping the poorer and

> uneducated - even the Archbishop of Canterbury has

> said as much- before Theresa May said so.....some

> of you are extremely verbose and I guess you have

> had an excellent education but you have no idea

> what the dispossessed are suffering- especially as

> they watch their kids sink into a life of drugs or

> petty crime....



The EU parliament costs ?34 million a week....across the entire EU. Let's be generous and say ?1 million a week for the UK.


(It's a fair point, but please get your facts right - it's nowhere near ?63 million a year let alone per week).


Besides, our own Government manages to waste far bigger sums of money - billions per year through shoddy contracting (Capita/Serco et al) and want to spend another ?50 billion on a high speed rail link to Manchester.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jaywalker Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> However, I think there is a more interesting

> general issue. There is quite a lot of comment

> (not least on TV) that the whole 'Justice' thing

> is just a distraction, that a democratic choice

> has been made. There is also a clamour for the

> executive to implement that choice without further

> ado - in particular, that Parliament would simply

> get in the way of the necessary negotiations.




This has nothing to do with "justice". It is a simple question as to whether the PM can do what she wants without checking with parliament.


Don't forget it wasn't just tory voters that voted to leave, and far from all tory voters voted to leave. So surely it's right and proper that this is considered in a cross party manner.


People still taling as if this is an attempt to thwart democracy and stop brexit all together, are just worrying for the sake of worrying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> jaywalker Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > However, I think there is a more interesting

> > general issue. There is quite a lot of comment

> > (not least on TV) that the whole 'Justice'

> thing

> > is just a distraction, that a democratic choice

> > has been made. There is also a clamour for the

> > executive to implement that choice without

> further

> > ado - in particular, that Parliament would

> simply

> > get in the way of the necessary negotiations.

>

>

>

> This has nothing to do with "justice". It is a

> simple question as to whether the PM can do what

> she wants without checking with parliament.

>

> Don't forget it wasn't just tory voters that voted

> to leave, and far from all tory voters voted to

> leave. So surely it's right and proper that this

> is considered in a cross party manner.

>

> People still taling as if this is an attempt to

> thwart democracy and stop brexit all together, are

> just worrying for the sake of worrying.


Of course the Judges could ask that the Scottish Parliament

pass Brexit.


That'd kill it :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

red devil Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think I'm in love with Lord Pannick. Genius...



Pannick on the streets of London, Pannick on the streets of Birmingham.


TM backs down (and wants a Red, White and Blue Brexit)


http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/theresa-may-agrees-to-publish-brexit-plans-before-triggering-article-50-in-major-uturn-a3413821.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lowlander Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


> The EU parliament costs ?34 million a

> week....across the entire EU. Let's be generous

> and say ?1 million a week for the UK.

>

> (It's a fair point, but please get your facts

> right - it's nowhere near ?63 million a year let

> alone per week).

>

> Besides, our own Government manages to waste far

> bigger sums of money - billions per year through

> shoddy contracting (Capita/Serco et al) and want

> to spend another ?50 billion on a high speed rail

> link to Manchester.


And then you need to consider what the army of lawyers, administrators and international negotiators that we are going to need over the next 10 years to undo/redo everything. ?63m a week will seem a bargain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I see Helen Hayes has voted against triggering

> article 50.

> Brexit Vote: 89 MPs Refuse To Back Triggering

> Article 50 In March - But Government Wins

> http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/brexit-vote-

> 89-mps-government-wins-article-50_uk_58485e1be4b07

> fd553cf1c56


Ken Clarke :)


Brexit could be scuppered today if legislative consent

is required from Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland.


More likely to refer that to EU court if at all IMHO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ratty Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It was the will of the misinformed people at one

> moment in time. Thats about it.


How do you know they were misinformed? The people of Wales had a lot of money fro the EU and were told how to use it on hare-brained schemes. Same thing probably happened in the North. Londoners have benefited greatly from the free movement of extremely cheap labour and increases in house prices, and a bottomless pit of renters to fund their 2nd, 3rd etc mortgages. Self-serving bunch of champagne socialists...as per usual

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • It doesn't work as a commercial venture.  Bit churlish to say I told you so.  I told you so.  I'll send less greetings cards.  What pees me off is international postage where you can no longer send light letters at 10 grammes, normal ones up to 20g, now all at the much more expensive 100 g  Didn't we vote to take back control and price everything according to irrational units like ounces? That's some obscure humour btw   
    • Available from Monday April 8th 2024, 2on2Walkies take pride in doggie care and only walk 2 furry friends at a time. I make sure that they get plenty of doggie interaction and socialisation in the park as well as making friends. Back home happy and tired I always check that the water bowl has fresh water and always make sure the doggie is left comfortable before I leave. I'm fully insured and have a couple of slots available for local walks to either Peckham Rye Park or Dulwich Park.  Thank you!  
    • Why would they only send them recorded delivery? I used the signed for option yesterday.
    • > however I know I will have to prove it and provide a receipt,  both I can't provide. So what leads you to say that the dustmen have done damage to it? 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...