Basic Principles of Communism's Legal System

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

I would just like to know your thoughts of the basis of the ideal legal system for communism. Would you advocate very authoritarian laws that impose strict and inflexible punishments for all violators leaving little judgement to be made on each specific case? Or would you advocate a legal system that judges ech case independantly and has few absolute laws? This would obviously be more flexible to each specific case, however, it could cause some inequality.

[Comrade Ceausescu]

i would say a healthy balanced mixture of both.it depends on the case really.sometimes theres no question about it.then you lay down your inflexable law.in a high profile type case,however,you need more options.

[Sovietski Soyuz]

You need a fairly strict set of laws in a Socialist state. With fair trials of course.

[Hate Is Art]

i would judge each case on its on merits, if you set down rules and laws for a certain cri,me then their will be punishmeants given out that people don't deserve, judging each case is the fairest way to treat criminals IMO

[RyeN]

There could be a leagal system that isnt as corupt. Why not just use sodium pentathol (truth serum) and ask the accused if they are guilty or not.

[Hate Is Art]

lol, that doesnt exist does it

[redstar2000]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2003, 11:09 PM
I would just like to know your thoughts of the basis of the ideal legal system for communism. Would you advocate very authoritarian laws that impose strict and inflexible punishments for all violators leaving little judgment to be made on each specific case? Or would you advocate a legal system that judges each case independently and has few absolute laws? This would obviously be more flexible to each specific case, however, it could cause some inequality.
Am I the only one who's noticed that some folks on the board are fascinated with the topic of crime and, especially, punishment in post-capitalist society?

Take a look at this "charming" thread...

http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?a...&f=8&t=17630&s= (http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=8&t=17630&s=)

Frankly, I detect a whiff of sado-masochism in some of this stuff...not the sort of attitude appropriate for revolutionaries.

Or perhaps it's just the "appeal" of "law"--Lenin was an attorney by professional training, you know.

In any event, insofar as communist society would have a "legal code" at all, it would certainly be distinguished by both brevity and clarity...anyone of normal intelligence would be able to read and understand it...as well as apply it in a humane way if called upon to do so.

It is not that big of a deal...except for those who may imagine themselves to be the next "Hammurabi" or "Justinian" or "Napoleon".

And I'm afraid we shall not be in need of new "great lawgivers".

We have other things to do.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[Hate Is Art]

we do :o

seriously though i think preventing crims is better than punishing for it, or we could go all the other way to saudi arabia and chop peoples hand off for stealing, they have very little theft there you know.

[sc4r]

Originally posted by redstar2000+Sep 28 2003, 01:04 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (redstar2000 @ Sep 28 2003, 01:04 PM)
[email protected] 27 2003, 11:09 PM
I would just like to know your thoughts of the basis of the ideal legal system for communism. Would you advocate very authoritarian laws that impose strict and inflexible punishments for all violators leaving little judgment to be made on each specific case? Or would you advocate a legal system that judges each case independently and has few absolute laws? This would obviously be more flexible to each specific case, however, it could cause some inequality.
Am I the only one who&#39;s noticed that some folks on the board are fascinated with the topic of crime and, especially, punishment in post-capitalist society?

Take a look at this "charming" thread...

http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?a...&f=8&t=17630&s= (http://www.che-lives.com/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=8&t=17630&s=)

Frankly, I detect a whiff of sado-masochism in some of this stuff...not the sort of attitude appropriate for revolutionaries.

Or perhaps it&#39;s just the "appeal" of "law"--Lenin was an attorney by professional training, you know.

In any event, insofar as communist society would have a "legal code" at all, it would certainly be distinguished by both brevity and clarity...anyone of normal intelligence would be able to read and understand it...as well as apply it in a humane way if called upon to do so.

It is not that big of a deal...except for those who may imagine themselves to be the next "Hammurabi" or "Justinian" or "Napoleon".

And I&#39;m afraid we shall not be in need of new "great lawgivers".

We have other things to do.

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas [/b]
Mr Pied Piper you would not be interested in anything that might actually be needed to make a society run.

It must be fascinating to sit down and plan how wonderful everything would be if everything was just as you would like it. Economies would run themselves, Everyone would be happy; nobody would ever take advantage; Paedopjiles would (two versions here: a) refrain - lol or b) be &#39;cured&#39;); Criminals would not exist, Mathematical theorems would correct themselves to show what RS thinks it would be better if they did. I expct even people like me would behave and not rtalk back.

Must be fascinating RS.

AS someone else said, a healthy balance is what is needed. Written rules ensure a degree of consistency and mitigate against kneejerk reactions, while perosnal judgement allows for flexibility.

A well written legal code, and a well trained judiciary are whats needed. You are in trouble without both (unless you live in the hacks wonderland).

[redstar2000]

When you delete the abuse and the absurdities of sc4r&#39;s posts, there&#39;s usually not much left.

But there&#39;s this...


A well written legal code, and a well trained judiciary are what&#39;s needed. You are in trouble without both...

Trouble indeed? As always, sc4r expresses his undying faith in "special expertise"...under no circumstances are ordinary working people to be allowed to rely on their own judgment in any matter of significance.

It is part of his over-all paradigm: let&#39;s do what is being done now "only" let&#39;s do it "better".

Now, that&#39;s something to really look forward to, isn&#39;t it?

Well, isn&#39;t it???

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

"A site about egocentricity and contradictory confusion"--sc4r
The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[sc4r]

You dont get tired of repeating this never ending accusations that I want to do what we are doing now, only better, do you.

For the umpteenth time. I wish to see liberal property rights abolished and common ownership of the means of production established.

I also wish to see a working version of direct democracy rather than representative democracy.

These two together represent a very very major change. The impact of either would be very far reaching and fundamental. Together they are about as far away from &#39;the same&#39; as almost anything could be and still stand a chance of working.

I do not wish to rely upon people magically &#39;becoming responsible&#39; (and in some of your ideas they would have to actually become magical in their abilities to read minds and perform superhuman computations).

I would not chuck every organisational idea that has ever been thought of out on the basis that it has been misused. To do so would be lunacy of the most extreme kind. I would retain that which could work within the parameters I outlinbed. This most certainly includes having some laws; and it also includes using (a greatly modified) market mechanism. Because both of these things produce benefits to people and society.

I am not like you; I am not primarily &#39;opposed to things&#39;; I am primarily FOR things.

Go and play with your fantasies hack. You are tedious to reply to.

[crazy comie]

some concreate laws would be in place. Trials would be run by a democraticly elected council for each trial

[sc4r]

Who would vote for these democratically elected juries?

Everybody?

Tha is going to put an awfully large overhead on a criminal trial; and in total a quite horrible overhead on society.

May I suggest something to you? Whenever you think &#39;that would be good&#39; think &#39;what would it cost&#39;. And remember that a cost by definition means that something else is going to be less good. Perfection is too expensive for anyone to afford.

It is also probably going to mean anyone with an unpopular view about anything is a dead duck; as the juries are voted in to get the knee jerk result the majoroity happens to think it wants at the time.

Believe me this effect can be bad enough without rigging the jury to almost ensure it.

[RyeN]

I dont think there will be a need for work camps as opposed to Coredtional facilities. In a communist Societey because everyone is involved more directley with the work that needs to be done, there will be less work needed done. Therfore no need for prisoners to slave there hours away. Instead they should under go a reprograming and then when the person is programed not to commit crimes any more they are relesaed back as a productive member of the team.

[Invader Zim]

In any socioty there must be rules to which the indviduals within the socioty must obey, to expect people to just get on with it is a stupid as it is impractical. Just think of what would happen on the most basic systems of socioty with out laws. Systems such as the roads etc. You need laws in socioty, just as you need punishments to those who fail to obide by laws.

The death penalty is a foolish idea, anyone who suggest otherwise is an idiot. Simply because if you have a miscarrage of justice you have just sent some poor innocent sod to the knackers...

Petty crimes should be punished wityh community service, rather than a prison or gulag sentance. Major crimes such as Murder should warrant a jail sentance. Paedophiles should NOT be imprisoned, as it is not really a fault they can help, I would rather consider it an illness, where they are either closley monitored in an enviroment well away from area&#39;s with children, or even commited to a mental heath facility for treatment.

[RyeN]

Thats not right. What the hell is wrong with you

[Invader Zim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 29 2003, 03:40 AM
Thats not right. What the hell is wrong with you
what an excelent and informative responce... however would you care to expand it beyond just being a single line and no reasoning?

[RyeN]

Quote: "Paedophiles should NOT be imprisoned, as it is not really a fault they can help"

What the hell would make you say such a thing out of the blue like that. we were just discussing the laws of a future communist socitey, when you come up with this. Paedophiles are sick fuckers is right.
However im sure that a person can not have sex with children. Thats one of the most sick things you can do to an innocent child. You said that its ok to have sex with children if you cant help yourself.

Sick responses like that deserve one line responses. Dont take it personaly, I dont think your a Paedophile or anything but seriously what the would make you say such a thing?

[crazy comie]

pepole would not now wich trial they are voting the jury in for.

[il Commy]

&#39;The Principles of Communism&#39; Fredrick Engels

http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works...11/prin-com.htm (http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/11/prin-com.htm)

[Mazzen]

I think that if one breaks the "law" they shouldn&#39;t always be punished. I smoke pot on a regular basis. It&#39;s against the law, but should I be punished for doing with mine own body what I see fit? I don&#39;t think that I insult/wound society b/c I smoke pot. Not all "laws" are fit, so why should "crimes" that break a certain "law" be given a "fit" punishment, if any?...just a thought.

[sc4r]

Because a law is, by definition, something you are not allowed to do. Ergo society should not allow you to do it.

What you should be arguing, perhaps, is that it is a bad law, and should be changed. But arguing that any law should not be enforced is really just silly.

A &#39;law&#39; that is not enforced is not really a law at all. It might be written down in a book that it is one, but it is not actually one.

Laws are the rules society says it needs people to follow if it is to function properly. All societies will have laws, because in a very real objective sense it is the laws of a society that define it more than anything else.

The fewer laws you have the freer you are. But what absolutist advocates of freedom neglect to realise is that nobody actually wants anyone else to have complete freedom. Your ideal might be complete freedom for you; but unless you are prepared to compromise and agree that you too will be subject to restraints on your freedom obviously nobody else will agree to have theirs constrained.

Which means that looked at another way laws are the agreements that people have implictly made with each other about their behaviour.

[crazy comie]

intresting post