Harry Pollard wrote: > We happened to be talking about "privilege", which is my name for an unjust > law - one which benefits one at the expense of another.
You are against "private laws", but you are in favor of privatization laws. Isn't the latter *also* "an unjust law - one which benefits one at the expense of another" ? Note that the laws are made by lawyers (jurists), which happen to be the *most privileged* profession on this planet (dominating all 3 estates of the state and much of private corporations). > Welfare for the rich - that is privilege certainly costs us a lot more than > welfare for the poor. But, my point was that all privilege should be ended. Wouldn't it make sense to start with the *largest* privileges ? > For I believe in justice (before charity) and privilege is the exact > opposite of justice. We can agree on that. But that contradicts the things you're advocating... Chris
