But the Law uses punishment, not only for the purpose of making undesired actions physically impossible, but also as an inducement; a fine, for example, does not make an action impossible, but only unattractive.
Source: Power, a new social analysis, 1938, by Bertrand Russell
More info.: https://russell-j.com/beginner/POWER03_030.HTM
* a brief comment:
There is a phrase often used: "equality under the law." But what does it mean in principle, and how does it actually function in practice?
The phrase is commonly understood to express the principle that all individuals stand on equal footing before the law and should not be discriminated against on the basis of social status, rank, or wealth.
In authoritarian regimes, rule is often exercised through the arbitrary will of those in power -- that is, rule by persons. In contrast, in democratic states, the basic principle is rule under law, and all citizens are expected to be treated equally under that law.
Yet this raises an important question:
Does "applying the same law uniformly to everyone" truly lead to substantive equality?
Consider a case in which a violation of the law results in a uniform fine of 10,000 yen. On the surface, this appears equal. However, for someone receiving welfare, 10,000 yen could represent a serious financial blow. For someone earning 100 million yen a year, it may feel like nothing more than a small tip -- and they might not hesitate to repeat the offense, paying the fine each time without concern.
If such a law, though formally equal, in effect favors the wealthy, can we truly say that "equality under the law" is functioning properly? This situation could easily generate a sense of unfairness and dissatisfaction among many citizens.
So how should "equality under the law" be defined?
Is it sufficient to apply the same rules to everyone, or should we also consider the actual impact those rules have on people in different circumstances?
This question points to a fundamental issue:
Does legal equality refer only to formal equality, or should it also encompass substantive equality?
What do you think?
President Trump would likely argue that applying the same law equally to all is the right approach. Or perhaps he might even claim that those in power deserve special treatment beyond that.
* Amazon Gift Card
