No Law, No Peace

A return to a previous note that has some ongoing pertinence. From a good review of Machiavelli by John Gray in The New Statesman: "...modern law is an artefact of state power. Probably nothing is more important for the protection of freedom than the independence of the judiciary from the executive; but this independence (which can never be complete) is possible only when the state is strong and secure. Western governments blunder around the world gibbering about human rights; but there can be no rights without the rule of law and no rule of law in a fractured or failed state, which is the usual result of western sponsored regime change. In many cases geopolitical calculations may lie behind the decision to intervene; yet it is a fantasy about the nature of rights that is the public rationale, and there is every sign that our leaders take the fantasy for real. The grisly fiasco that has been staged in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya – a larger and more dangerous version of which seems to be unfolding in Syria – testifies to the hold on western leaders of the delusion that law can supplant politics."

"There can be no rights without the rule of law." That is a concept worth reflecting on because so often you see rights argued as infringed upon by all law. Rousseau etc.. And "law is an artifact of state power." So a bit of a contradiction, no? But the American structure is very different and was very new. In America the government is also restrained and limited by law. That is where the safety of our rights lies. 

No law, no peace.