‘Law and order’ is most often used as a synonym for justice. But, are laws always just? Is order always the result of justice?
What is justice?
Justice is equality – nothing more and nothing less. To elaborate too far on what is meant by “justice is equality” would be to create misconceptions where they need not be. Some things are better left unsaid. To add only a little clarity to the meaning: justice is absolute equality where justice is demanded; where justice is not demanded, an injustice is unlikely to be found.
‘Law and order’ is necessary for justice, but it is not sufficient. In other words, law and order is necessary for equality, but not sufficient to bring it to fruition. Laws draw the boundaries of justice as they are recognized to date. Order is the framework in which the laws are applied. However, laws are also always behind the times. And order is always built in part on the foundations of past injustice.
Those who demand justice are at all times courageous, but sometimes rash. Those who demand law and order are at all times careful, but sometimes draconian. There are perhaps some who fall in between these two types, but they are rare, and most often tend to be the ‘law and order’ types. They can be differentiated from other law and order types only inasmuch as they are less careful than the rest.
Those who demand justice are pioneers. They are most often vilified by their contemporaries and the rashest elements among them always become the subject of headlines and criticism. Law and order in its natural insufficiency requires that any demand for justice be moderated and penned in by the existing social framework. However, this cannot do for the pioneers. They will always fight and the courageous among them will be ignored or patronized by society; the rash among them will be punished and defamed. It is only the unfolding of history that vindicates these fighters for justice, both the courageous and the rash. However, the rash, even after many years have passed, may still be considered infamous, despite the correctness of their cause.
Those who demand law and order are stewards. The stewards always desire a more complete application of justice, but often lack the foresight or will to broaden it’s definition and scope. They are dedicated to the natural necessity of law and order, but the draconian among them incorrectly claim that necessity to be sufficient. The careful can never be accused of rashness, but neither would it be right to call them courageous. Rather, its more correct to describe them as dutiful, kind, measured, and commonplace. In contrast, the draconian stewards lack kindness and are less commonplace than the careful. Their commitment to law and order is so strong, that they may be accused of a rashness that is diametrically opposed to the rashness of the pioneers of justice. Like the pioneers, they too make the headlines, but are most often donned with fame and praise. However, history tends to work against the draconian in proportion to the time that passes. Their infamy is less memorable, but more long-lasting and certain than the pioneers of justice.