Okay, here we go.
Basically, the question on chat has come up: What is the purpose behind law? To regulate social interaction and conflict, by defining and limiting citizens' rights? To promote social stagnation and preserve the status quo, to the benefit of the priveleged? Something entirely different?
The question started as referring to german law in particular, but given that that's pretty specific, we can totally expand it.
We've gone over a few points already, and, if nothing else, I think we kinda established a couple of important areas to look at:
- The question of author. Who influenced the creation of the law, was there bias present, was this significant enough to change the law's stated purpose?
- Does the content of the law support the its stated purpose?
- Who's writing and interpreting laws today? How are they proceeding? Wherein lies their bias?
The last point is less a question of purpose at creation, and more one of current application and institution, but it's certainly still interesting and relevant.
I will say that a major bias towards the wealthy (or otherwise priveleged) lies in the fact that lawyers are often effectively voices for hire. The fact that their skill influences the outcome of legal battles, coupled with the fact that hiring skilled lawyers costs money, which the rich possess per definition, does skew the balance. I totally aknowlege that. But I think that's more of a problem in the institution, and not one with the law itself. That is to say, it is a problem, but not one that's inherent in the law, and not one that you can expect the law in its entirety to fix. Mind you, I'd be interested in hearing some proposed fixes to this one, cause I can't think of any.
Other points we've already adressed is that loopholes in the law, particularly financial and environmental law, exist and are open for abuse. But that kinda links to the previous point, in that it's impossible to write law that covers every eventuality. There will always be loopholes, and the people with the resources to exploit them will benefit from that.
Ultimately, I'm not saying that there's nothing wrong with our society, far from it. Not saying that the law can't be abused, or that some parts of the law don't reflect financial interests, see copyright law. Not even saying that there isn't any bias towards the rich fucks on the German equivalent of Wall Street, I don't even know where that would be. Frankfurt, maybe? Regardless.
Just that, in the case of Germany (not speaking for other countries), I don't think that bias is overwhelming. And that, I don't believe that the law, and the legislative body of germany exist solely to further the interests of the priveleged. (Which I believe was the orignal argument)
In fact, if you guys were right, I'd have a constitutional duty to tear some shit up, and that would really interfere with my weekend plans.
Also, in b4 "What a cunt"
Edit:
To start this debate off on a high note, the title you're looking for is "The law and its benefactors"
