[CONTROVERSIAL]: A Defense of Terrorism

Steve Schear azur at netcom.com
Tue Jun 10 19:24:23 PDT 1997



>I understand, but my point was that at some point the system of "law"
>became simply a system of supplicating the masses and no longer serves
>justice.  When the system of law ceases to be a system of law and becomes
>of system of corruption I no longer refer to it as law.  Important
>Orwellian distinction.  Never let the bastards control the definitions and
>language.

"Nothing distinguishes more clearly conditions in a free country from those
in a country under arbitrary government than the observance in the former
of the great principles known as the Rule of Law. Stripped of all
technicalities, this means that government in all its actions is bound by
rules fixed and announced beforehand-rules which make it possible to
foresee with fair certainty how the authority will use its coercive powers
in given circumstances and to plan one's individual affairs on the basis of
this knowledge."

>From "The Road to Surfdom," F.A. Hayek, as quoted from the classical
exposition by A. V. Dicey in "The Law of the Constitution" (8th ed.), p.
198, the Rule of Law "means, in the first place the absolute supremacy or
predominance of regular law as opposed to the influence of arbitrary power,
and excludes the existence of arbitrariness, of prerogative, or even of
wide discretionary authority on the part of government."

--Steve








More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list