December 6th, 2005

eyes black and white

Of Law considered without Law Enforcement

Wretchard illustrates an essential principle sorely missed by all the beautiful souls who hate seeing evil so much that they'd rather put their head in the sand than do something, and take such pride out of it that they feel they can despise those who actually go out and fight evil. And I mean quite a lot of so called liberals, and also much too many libertarians. Law considered without law enforcement is a chimera. And neglecting law enforcement as trivial and subordinate to law is but rationalizing the previous case. Law enforcement has a cost; it has consequences; the means required to enforce law induce severe constraints on what law can effectively be in reality, as contrasted to what it purports to be in its official declaration; the consequences of a law are the effects its actual enforcement have, not the wishful cover stories displayed by whoever lobbies for the law. Confusing a human edict for a godly edict, thinking that some kind of formal utterance transubstantiates human words into divine words and change the very essence of the world... that's an anerism. Justice without Police, Peace without the means of War, social order without self-defense... they are the same delusionary principles, that in reality mean only one thing: the claim of the inalienable right of criminals to successfully attack their victims.