Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
If you really want to reflect on justice, I would suggest that you read, or re-read, Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, Book V. I notice, too, that there is little debate here about the division between the justice concept of "an eye for an eye" and magnanimity.
I notice, too, that there is little debate here about the division between the justice concept of "an eye for an eye" and magnanimity.
Quite right, Simon. It's been mentioned several times ("an eye for an eye" isn't justice, it's revenge), but that aspect of the debate hasn't caught on. Justice has many facets; one has to sort through them and identify them before a good, thorough discussion can take place.
If you really want to reflect on justice, I would suggest that you read, or re-read, Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, Book V. I notice, too, that there is little debate here about the division between the justice concept of "an eye for an eye" and magnanimity.
I think it's very easy to TALK about both "an eye for an eye" and "magnanimity". The first sounds so brutal. The second sounds so warm and fuzzy.
But what's the reality?
Ever been in a prison? Ever been mugged in a dark alley? Ever been raped? Ever had your child molested?
Do you want a special prison with a modern rehabilitation program built in your neighborhood?
How about a halfway house for ex-cons in your neighborhood?
How about just an office where ex-cons have to check in monthly in your neighborhood?
And Simon, I'm not specifically asking this of you. But whenever these facilities need to be built, a hue and cry goes up in almost any city or town where they're proposed. And the reason is that many of these people are truly bad people who have done evil things against others. There are lots of people who deserve magnanimity. I'm not sure that hardened criminals are the people we should portion out our magnanimity to.
I once had one of the students, a Latino, come to me and ask me to help him get out of a gang in northern Virginia. I knew it was a task beyond my knowledge, but I did have contacts that could help. The kid (about age 14) had told me the only way to get out of the gang was to play Russian roulette. I made the appropriate contacts, and within 48 hours had someone at the school to help the kid work himself out of the gang. It was too late. No, the kid wasn't dead, but he had gotten himself out of the gang. I asked what he had to do. He said, "Mr. Lynch, I want you to trust me on this. You don't want to know because it would haunt you forever."
I'm sorry, I have no magnanimity for many, perhaps most, of the gang members whose initiations include the rape of minors or who force 14 year-olds to play Russian roulette...and worse. I want them deported or put behind bars. Period.
Now, for those for whom rehabilitation could likely be successful...all for it. I'm for reducing sentences for some types of crimes, and I'm for eliminating prison for some types of crimes/offenders. But there are hardened criminals...particularly those who are repeat offenders, who have given up any right to ask for compassion from the rest of society.
I'm sorry, I have no magnanimity for many, perhaps most, of the gang members whose initiations include the rape of minors or who force 14 year-olds to play Russian roulette...and worse. I want them deported or put behind bars. Period.
Now, for those for whom rehabilitation could likely be successful...all for it. I'm for reducing sentences for some types of crimes, and I'm for eliminating prison for some types of crimes/offenders. But there are hardened criminals...particularly those who are repeat offenders, who have given up any right to ask for compassion from the rest of society.
I agree with you. I'm not advocating being soft on crime- that's dangerous and exposes innocent people to high risk, criminal behavior.
I take issue with our society and how we treat each other. Most old systems don't really work in the here and now. We have allowed criminals (white collar included) to organize and affect the very core of our society. I agree that anyone who enters this country and commits a crime should be deported with no chance of ever being granted citizenship. We need to tighten our immigration standards and deny entrance to anyone with a criminal record or criminal associations. I'm not picking on foreign born individuals, it's just that we already have a serious crime problem and don't need to invite more. It's also not fair to the law abiding immigrants.
We need to reevaluate our present prison system. We should separate the non violent prison population and keep them away from those who will teach them more. If prisoners are repeat offenders and have a violent record or are rapists/offenders- they should never be released into the general population.
I've read about some new programs where they have prisoners training dogs and horses that are to be used in special needs programs. The object is to have them bond with another living being and learn a quality that they lack- patience. Who knows, this may make a difference for some of the prisoners. I don't have enough information to go on.
We need preventative action with our young people to keep them from joining gangs. Look at the massages they get from pop culture. It's all about materialism, violence, sex and short on anything of real value. It's not just the criminal culture that is causing this. We have young people who are encouraged to have high self esteem. This has been a buzz word in the schools as the end all be all cure for everything wrong with the kids. You have experience in the educational field- have you implemented programs like these? Traditionally, didn't self esteem result from accomplishment? Doesn't it require kids to struggle to master a skill and then feel the natural sense of pride and satisfaction from their hard work? Now, everyone gets a prize- just for showing up. If we could reach the kids at an early age, see where their talents and passions are and make it possible for those children to pursue them; wouldn't that be better in the long run? Wouldn't there be more focus in the child's life? I understand that many parents are too disengaged be helpful to their children, but what can we do? Do you support the present emphasis on standardized testing? Is this a cookie cutter model offering a one size fits all or is it failing to help? My children have been out of school for many years, so I'm not up on the present state of affairs in the educational system.
At the risk of sounding warm and fuzzy- I believe, with all my heart, that we need to be very conscious of how we treat each other. The escalation of the violence and insensitivity prevalent in our culture is causing enormous harm on all levels. What we see happening is the fruit of what we sow.
We have young people who are encouraged to have high self esteem. This has been a buzz word in the schools as the end all be all cure for everything wrong with the kids. You have experience in the educational field- have you implemented programs like these? Traditionally, didn't self esteem result from accomplishment? Doesn't it require kids to struggle to master a skill and then feel the natural sense of pride and satisfaction from their hard work? Now, everyone gets a prize- just for showing up. If we could reach the kids at an early age, see where their talents and passions are and make it possible for those children to pursue them; wouldn't that be better in the long run? Wouldn't there be more focus in the child's life? I understand that many parents are too disengaged be helpful to their children, but what can we do? Do you support the present emphasis on standardized testing? Is this a cookie cutter model offering a one size fits all or is it failing to help? My children have been out of school for many years, so I'm not up on the present state of affairs in the educational system.
At the risk of sounding warm and fuzzy- I believe, with all my heart, that we need to be very conscious of how we treat each other. The escalation of the violence and insensitivity prevalent in our culture is causing enormous harm on all levels. What we see happening is the fruit of what we sow.
I think you make some excellent points.
My middle school had a number of programs that we felt encouraged students to develop high self-esteem. My staff was too tightly wound around the "only highest accomplishment deserves praise" model. This became problematic because we were a gifted center, so about a third of our students were gifted-talented. That was fine for them...they excelled in Math Counts, Debating, Science Olympiad, and so forth. But the other 2/3 of the school never measured up to the GT kids, so few teachers could be persuaded to tackle the self-esteem issues some of those kids had. It was a constant struggle to motivate those teachers.
And that's why I do approve of some kind of standardized testing program. WHen teachers' success depends on their success with ALL students, suddenly the climate begins to change. We had a nationally recognized speaker in one day who had been a high school principal. He had had a biology teacher who always claimed to be the best in the school out of about 3...until the standardized test scores came back and he had the worst results. Things changed.
I also had an opportunity to have a distinguished Black professor from Howard University speak to our faculty. He talked about his background -- grew up poor in the ghettos of NW D.C. And he said to my teachers -- "You want a poor Black kid to have high self esteem. Don't give him empty praise. Teach him to read and write. This was also echoed when I had a chance for a sit-down meeting with Julian Bond of the NAACP.
I agree with you, also, regarding the pop-culture and gangsta-culture. Total insensitivity toward others. Offensive language, violence and sex in the music, violent degradation in the images of that culture. Certainly not right thought and right speech.
My middle school had a number of programs that we felt encouraged students to develop high self-esteem. My staff was too tightly wound around the "only highest accomplishment deserves praise" model. This became problematic because we were a gifted center, so about a third of our students were gifted-talented. That was fine for them...they excelled in Math Counts, Debating, Science Olympiad, and so forth. But the other 2/3 of the school never measured up to the GT kids, so few teachers could be persuaded to tackle the self-esteem issues some of those kids had. It was a constant struggle to motivate those teachers.
This is what I was thought. In our school system, it seemed that the highest performers and the special needs kids got the lion's share of the attention. The kids in the middle were not given the opportunities to find their niche. This is where I was wondering if it would be beneficial to see who was not an academically good performer and how to direct these kids to areas that lead to training programs for trades and a chance at making a good living. Maybe even apprentice programs in combination with good academic basics. Some kids like to work with their hands and are unaware of different opportunities and fields. Too many people have little knowledge or appreciation for the work it takes for us to have this lifestyle. Of course, the economy needs to improve so that there are jobs for future generations.
And that's why I do approve of some kind of standardized testing program. WHen teachers' success depends on their success with ALL students, suddenly the climate begins to change. We had a nationally recognized speaker in one day who had been a high school principal. He had had a biology teacher who always claimed to be the best in the school out of about 3...until the standardized test scores came back and he had the worst results. Things changed.
I also had an opportunity to have a distinguished Black professor from Howard University speak to our faculty. He talked about his background -- grew up poor in the ghettos of NW D.C. And he said to my teachers -- "You want a poor Black kid to have high self esteem. Don't give him empty praise. Teach him to read and write. This was also echoed when I had a chance for a sit-down meeting with Julian Bond of the NAACP.
I think that it's a combination of test results and student performance all year that helps evaluate teachers and class material. I have read stories about teachers preparing classes for those tests and negating any true measure of their effectiveness. I don't know if that's widespread or not.
I agree with you, also, regarding the pop-culture and gangsta-culture. Total insensitivity toward others. Offensive language, violence and sex in the music, violent degradation in the images of that culture. Certainly not right thought and right speech.
It's not just the kids- it's the adults, too. We have such a fake culture. Excesses in plastic surgery= fake beauty. Drugs that enhance performance = fake athletes/stars. Excessive debt= fake wealth. Cheating= fake intelligence, qualifications. And on and on.
I think the word "justice" is often abused to fit some kind of agenda. And yes, like any *word* it only points at something but in itself lacks solid essence. When people get attached to their concept of "justice", there's a real risk of that turning into a crusade, losing touch with whatever inspired it. History doesn't have a favorable record of justice.
I believe that at any moment there is the right, compassionate action. The next moment, or the prior one, that action is likely to be different. The "trick" is to know what that is for you, right here and right now. That's all that matters: if right now I see suffering, how to alleviate it and do what is necessary to alleviate it, there is no need for me to wrap my head about some mental concept.
I think that it's a combination of test results and student performance all year that helps evaluate teachers and class material. I have read stories about teachers preparing classes for those tests and negating any true measure of their effectiveness. I don't know if that's widespread or not.
A good point. Although, if the test tests what's really important, than I don't have a problem with that. The Virginia statewide tests are considered quite good, although Maryland's had an even higher reputation.
. We need to tighten our immigration standards and deny entrance to anyone with a criminal record or criminal associations.
Anyone with a criminal record, or even a history of alcoholism, is not supposed to be given an immigration visa. And yet...it's so easy to bribe officials in many countries to give someone a clean slate for their US embassy application. It amazes me that embassy officials aren't more careful about this, but on the other hand, there's nothing they can do if someone has all their papers in order and behaves normally at the interview.
Anyone with a criminal record, or even a history of alcoholism, is not supposed to be given an immigration visa. And yet...it's so easy to bribe officials in many countries to give someone a clean slate for their US embassy application. It amazes me that embassy officials aren't more careful about this, but on the other hand, there's nothing they can do if someone has all their papers in order and behaves normally at the interview.
So true. If there is corruption at the top levels of a society- it's not surprising to see it in the general population as well. If moral and ethical standards are not actually practiced and valued in a society- they become meaningless and an illusion.
So, you would deport "foreigners"/"aliens" who break the law. And would you exile "citizens" who do the same? What is the difference between people born in different places? If justice is not equal, it is not justice.
The Talion principle ("an eye for an eye") was quite an innovation in a society where the punishment was usually far more severe than the crime. Alternatively, you may want to consider the ancient Welsh code of laws or the Irish Brehon laws with their system of fines rather than judicial murder and imprisonment.
In the US, I understand that there is now a prison regime which, to my mind, goes against all principles of justice and equity by imposing silent, solitary confinement which are outlawed in most civilised societies.
As Buddhists, I think we need to be very careful of condemning others for actions whose seeds we can notice within ourselves. We also need to remember that, at its heart, Buddhism teaches that each one of us can learn to walk the Noble Eightfold Path, no matter where we start from. The recidivism figures demonstrate very clearly that the 'justice system' is inadequate for the purpose of creating good, happy and co-operative people, serving only as concentration camps.
So, you would deport "foreigners"/"aliens" who break the law. And would you exile "citizens" who do the same? What is the difference between people born in different places? If justice is not equal, it is not justice.
Simon, I don't know what country you live in, but here in the USA illegal immigration and the problems that they bring with them is straining us to the breaking point. My family immigrated LEGALLY from eastern Europe and had to learn English and prove that they were able to work.
So, you would deport "foreigners"/"aliens" who break the law. And would you exile "citizens" who do the same? What is the difference between people born in different places? If justice is not equal, it is not justice.
Simon, I don't know what country you live in, but here in the USA illegal immigration and the problems that they bring with them is straining us to the breaking point. My family immigrated LEGALLY from eastern Europe and had to learn English and prove that they were able to work.
@kayte, I live in Europe, specifically the UK, and my father's family immigrated from Germany 150 years ago. 'Immigration' is seen as a problem here too and is a matter used by politicians here as in the US. But I would ask you to consider on what basis does anyone consider one piece of land as 'belonging' to some and not others.
It does not take much study of the Dharma to realise that the whole idea of countries and nations is a gigantic con trick perpetuated by the powerful and imposed on the poor. Just as Buddhism in India is a way out of the caste system, I maintain that nationalism should be shrugged off when we Take Refuge. The result is that we understand our connectedness to all others, including particularly those who are in need. This, I would suggest, is at the very basis of any sense of justice and why I said that that if it is not equal it is not justice.
@kayte, I live in Europe, specifically the UK, and my father's family immigrated from Germany 150 years ago. 'Immigration' is seen as a problem here too and is a matter used by politicians here as in the US. But I would ask you to consider on what basis does anyone consider one piece of land as 'belonging' to some and not others.
It does not take much study of the Dharma to realise that the whole idea of countries and nations is a gigantic con trick perpetuated by the powerful and imposed on the poor. Just as Buddhism in India is a way out of the caste system, I maintain that nationalism should be shrugged off when we Take Refuge. The result is that we understand our connectedness to all others, including particularly those who are in need. This, I would suggest, is at the very basis of any sense of justice and why I said that that if it is not equal it is not justice.
Simon, I don't disagree with much of what you say, but I do have some concerns about the influx of people over our borders. What do you think will happen when we reach the breaking point? Any country has limits to their resources and how many people they can support. We already have severe water shortages, the farmland is losing topsoil from overproduction, animals are losing their habitat, growing pollution problems, landfills overflowing. That's just the beginning. Our social services, hospitals, schools, charitable organizations, law enforcement and resources too numerous to list are all strained to the brink. Some hospitals are closing because they went broke taking care of illegal immigrants. The numbers are staggering.
If we try it your way, what happens to the quality of life? How long before we all live in third world conditions and the powerful become richer and more powerful? What causes these other countries to have only the rich and poor? What causes the oppressive living conditions? Wouldn't it be better to address those issues to help people thrive and have a better life?
Can you avoid all of this by taking refuge? I don't mean any offense but I've long been told that all I had to do was have faith and pray and any problems would be resolved. It didn't and isn't taking refuge the same thing?
Of course I do understand the concerns about the problems we face. You are quite right that our style of life (what you terms "quality of life") will have to change. Isn't that justice? Where some have more than they need and others die for want is that not inevitable? After all, understanding, whether as a Buddhist or as an historian, that no empire, republic or system lasts indefinitely, we would do well to make friends with our poor neighbours: who knows when they may become the owners?
I am certainly not suggesting that Taking Refuge or meditation or studying the sutras or any other specifically Buddhist practice will fill empty bellies or cure the sick. It is as repellent an idea to me as similar words, mutatis mutandis, from Christians or Muslims or capitalists. I believe in "Buddhism with its sleeves rolled up", active in the world for the relief of suffering wherever it exists.
This is precisely what I mean by "justice", a far wider scope than simply the application of a code of laws.
Of course I do understand the concerns about the problems we face. You are quite right that our style of life (what you terms "quality of life") will have to change. Isn't that justice? Where some have more than they need and others die for want is that not inevitable? After all, understanding, whether as a Buddhist or as an historian, that no empire, republic or system lasts indefinitely, we would do well to make friends with our poor neighbours: who knows when they may become the owners?
I am certainly not suggesting that Taking Refuge or meditation or studying the sutras or any other specifically Buddhist practice will fill empty bellies or cure the sick. It is as repellent an idea to me as similar words, mutatis mutandis, from Christians or Muslims or capitalists. I believe in "Buddhism with its sleeves rolled up", active in the world for the relief of suffering wherever it exists.
This is precisely what I mean by "justice", a far wider scope than simply the application of a code of laws.
Simon, I can agree that other populations in the world have paid dearly for the benefit of others. My husband and I live a fairly simple life that would probably be considered austere by others in our community, but we are happy and grateful. We don't indulge in the excesses that many people associate with the typical American, our egos don't require it. We live a good life but don't take more than we need, even when we can afford to do so. So how do we equalize life? Do you appoint bureaucrats to confiscate and distribute the world's goods? How do we measure the division? There are people who have a great deal but it's all on credit. If it's taken, so what? It's not like they paid for any of it. There are others who planned and only acquired goods when they could pay for them. If those goods are taken, they are a real loss to the owner because he actually owns them. Is that justice?
Yes, empires rise and fall. How can we be sure that any new empire that arises will value justice? When people and cultures are so disconnected from one another, how can they practice justice based on resentment, hate, envy, or vengeance? How do you prevent large numbers of people migrating to other areas from becoming a new age of colonialism? That never goes horribly wrong, does it?
Simon, we take risks on a daily basis in hopes of it paying off with a minimum downside. Most people are adverse to taking risks that could cost them everything. That is an act of desperation. Desperation can cause people to commit crimes like murder and theft. In that manner, people are able to force others to share their risks. Is this justice?
You're response of "We take risks" sounds sort of like "whatever". Maybe you could go out on a limb, take a risk, and give us a more profound response. That's the kind of response that I expect from a disengaged teenager at a fast food place when I tell him that he got my order wrong and he says, "Whatever...." for handing me a Big Mac instead of a salad. :whatever:
I'm not sure but there may have been a misunderstanding about the deportation issue.
So, you would deport "foreigners"/"aliens" who break the law. And would you exile "citizens" who do the same? What is the difference between people born in different places? If justice is not equal, it is not justice.
I think kayte was referring to illegal aliens who break the law. It makes sense that they should be deported, since they're here illegally anyway. In fact, AFAIK, they do get deported. My concern is with legal immigration; undesirables who manage to game the system and get an immigration visa, then commit crimes when they get here (the Russian mafia being one of the most extreme examples).
I think we're probably all agreed that in a truly just world, the type of neglect, abuse, and illiteracy that are some of the prime causes of people becoming lost and running afoul of the criminal justice system wouldn't exist. And that those criminals who are capable of being rehabilitated would receive rehabilitation and job training. The question is, what about those who for whatever reason, aren't able to become rehabilitated? And what about violent criminals who do go through rehabilitation? Would any of us want any of them living down the street? Could we trust the system (the rehabilitation and evaluation of prisoners completing such programs) enough to feel comfortable with formerly violent people living next door?
The three most important books about justice are: A Theory of Justice by John Rawls; Anarchy, State & Utopia by Robert Nozick; Liberalism & The Limits of Justice by Michael J. Sandel. Has anyone in this thread studied even one of these books?
The three most important books about justice are: A Theory of Justice by John Rawls; Anarchy, State & Utopia by Robert Nozick; Liberalism & The Limits of Justice by Michael J. Sandel. Has anyone in this thread studied even one of these books?
BuckyG, I didn't intend to take your thread off on a tangent, I was just responding to the comments.
I have not read any of these books, but I'm interested in what you would like to say about them. "Justice" seems to be a concept open to interpretation. I have a particular interest in the Greek laws on Hubris. If we had such a system in place today, I imagine that our politicians and celebrities would be held to much higher standards.
BuckyG, I didn't intend to take your thread off on a tangent, I was just responding to the comments.
You're sweet, thanks, but it's not my thread; and I don't think your tangenting.
I have not read any of these books, but I'm interested in what you would like to say about them.
I was just putting a feeler out for discussion. Perhaps I'll say something later.
I have a particular interest in the Greek laws on Hubris. If we had such a system in place today, I imagine that our politicians and celebrities would be held to much higher standards.
I'm sorry you think that my answer was dismissive. It is, after all, half a century since I was a teenager! When I said that we have to take risks what I mean is that we have to stop doing things the way we have been doing them: we can see the results of our age-old behaviours and yet we carry on repeating them - a pretty good definition of madness.
The risks we have to take are to dismantle the barriers we have created, such as frontiers, which keep the poor away from the resources which would empower them. Disempowering the poor and the weak is the ultimate injustice. This is the heart of the story about the Samaritan rescuer: he took risks on a dangerous road to help an enemy, where the injured man's own people avoided him.
As a Buddhist, I believe in our connectedness in all directions and all times to all that is. The consequence is that, even if as this thread has suggested, there is no 'justice' in a world where bad things happen to good people, we are called and challenged, as individuals, to act justly and equitably towards all sentient beings and the world at large.
I'm sorry you think that my answer was dismissive. It is, after all, half a century since I was a teenager! When I said that we have to take risks what I mean is that we have to stop doing things the way we have been doing them: we can see the results of our age-old behaviours and yet we carry on repeating them - a pretty good definition of madness.
Simon, no need to apologize at all, I have a snarky sense of humor that doesn't always come across that way in written form and I'm bad at using emoticons. It's been way too long since my younger days, too! I wouldn't go back, though. I agree that the present system has not lived up to expectations. I say follow the money- that's the source of resistance for meaningful change.
The risks we have to take are to dismantle the barriers we have created, such as frontiers, which keep the poor away from the resources which would empower them. Disempowering the poor and the weak is the ultimate injustice. This is the heart of the story about the Samaritan rescuer: he took risks on a dangerous road to help an enemy, where the injured man's own people avoided him.
Again, I agree. I can't remember the name of the African leader who observed the pain and suffering that befell the indigenous people when they find rich, natural resources in their land. There is an excellent DVD that you might find interesting- http://www.flowthefilm.com/. I'm afraid that this is the next challenge in justice.
As a Buddhist, I believe in our connectedness in all directions and all times to all that is. The consequence is that, even if as this thread has suggested, there is no 'justice' in a world where bad things happen to good people, we are called and challenged, as individuals, to act justly and equitably towards all sentient beings and the world at large.
I'm not a Buddhist but I do value the principles and try to apply them to my life. I think that there is a power greater than us all but nothing like the deity revered by organized religions. I do believe that we are all connected, too. That's what makes our thoughts, words, and actions so very important because of how they affect others as well as ourselves. We can only expect true justice when all people desire truth and justice in equal measure for all instead of manipulated, poor reproductions of these key values.
I notice injustice and I realise that my sense of what is just has grown and changed over the years. I also notice that I have had many teachers and role models who have continued my education. Often, I have had to re-evaluate and confront preconceptions, assumptions and 'received wisdom'. Tonight, I am reminded of Debbie, with whom I worked in a publishers' office, many years ago. More than anyone, she showed me the truth within the women's movement and shed a light on a new understanding that there is a single struggle for justice and peace, that all the movements that I had espoused (CND, Anti-Apartheid, Civil Rights, Gay Liberation) were only of value if we understood that justice is for all, equally, irrespective of gender, colour, sexual orientation, religion or sense of humour.
So, to return to the OP's assertion that there is no such thing as "justice", I would most strongly deny it. It is we, you and I and anyone who cares enough to speak and act for it, that create justice. It is not some great monolith, unchanging and eternal or, if it is, it is outwith our comprehension. It is a pattern that we impose on the world, a story we tell ourselves and hand on to our children.
There is such a thing as justice because we make it so.
It is we, you and I and anyone who cares enough to speak and act for it, that create justice. It is not some great monolith, unchanging and eternal or, if it is, it is outwith our comprehension. It is a pattern that we impose on the world, a story we tell ourselves and hand on to our children.There is such a thing as justice because we make it so.
I love this, Simon. But alas, there aren't enough people devoted to creating moments of justice in day-to-day life. And the "system" is difficult to change. But I agree we should all maintain an enlightened vision, and act on our values and compassion to create a more just world.
So, to return to the OP's assertion that there is no such thing as "justice", I would most strongly deny it. It is we, you and I and anyone who cares enough to speak and act for it, that create justice. It is not some great monolith, unchanging and eternal or, if it is, it is outwith our comprehension. It is a pattern that we impose on the world, a story we tell ourselves and hand on to our children.
There is such a thing as justice because we make it so.
Well maybe we don’t disagree that much. I acknowledged there’s some wiring in our brain which makes us susceptible for this kind of illusion… It probably had some evolutionary benefit.
My main focus was criminal justice. We are prone to feel that inflicting suffering on a person is “just” because of what he did. And I know the feeling well, trust me. But I think this feeling of “justice” is really just anger in disguise. The talk of “justice” is a rationalization of anger and fear.
The Buddhist approach is the compassionate one. Compassion is for all people including the criminal specimens. Inflicting suffering and labeling it “justice” gives a false sense of closure. Nothing is repaired; nothing is settled when the murderer is executed. This false sense of closure stops us from looking at the real problems. The real problems are diverse and complicated, and they may be difficult or impossible to solve. In that sense it could be a smart thing to settle for the illusion of “justice” being done.
My main focus was criminal justice. We are prone to feel that inflicting suffering on a person is “just” because of what he did. And I know the feeling well, trust me. But I think this feeling of “justice” is really just anger in disguise. The talk of “justice” is a rationalization of anger and fear.
The Buddhist approach is the compassionate one. Compassion is for all people including the criminal specimens. Inflicting suffering and labeling it “justice” gives a false sense of closure. Nothing is repaired; nothing is settled when the murderer is executed. This false sense of closure stops us from looking at the real problems. The real problems are diverse and complicated, and they may be difficult or impossible to solve. In that sense it could be a smart thing to settle for the illusion of “justice” being done.
zenff- I don't know where you're from, but do you think that society is becoming more vengeful and justifying it by calling it justice? I understand that in criminal situations, the legal system sets the punishment, but do you think that people seek to extract their own interpretation of justice beyond the law?
zenff- I don't know where you're from, but do you think that society is becoming more vengeful and justifying it by calling it justice?
The Netherlands. And yes I do.
I understand that in criminal situations, the legal system sets the punishment, but do you think that people seek to extract their own interpretation of justice beyond the law?
I'm sorry. I don't really understand that question.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and probably stir up a lot of controversy, but here goes anyway. I'm just going to tell it like it was taught me by my teachers. In order to talk about justice, whatever we may mean by that word, I think we first have to back up a step and ask, is there such a thing as a victim? For isn't justice actually about the redress of victims? What I have been taught is that there are no victims in Buddhism. (gasp!) Each of us creates our own happiness or suffering by creating the conditions that lead to either happiness or suffering. There is no one else to blame for our unhappiness or even our happiness except ourselves. If someone attacks us or otherwise causes us harm, it is simply because we ourselves have created the conditions for that to occur. In fact, that's the ONLY way it can occur, according to the Buddha. Does that mean we just ignore a wrong by one person to another, just shrug it off and say it was just karma? No, that's not what I'm saying at all. What I am saying is that we need to develop personal responsibility for our actions and stop blaming our parents, society, the weather, the Republicans (or the Democrats, pick your poison), the universe,or whatever the case may be and start examining our life as karmic reflection, as my teacher puts it. Only then can we empower ourselves to make the changes in our lives that result in happiness rather than continuing to revolve in cyclic existence forever and ever.
Again, that doesn't mean that when we see someone harming someone else that we shouldn't do anything about it or that we think the person receiving the attack somehow "deserves" it. That's not the lesson to be drawn here. We all "deserve" it (i.e. have created the causes for suffering) as we all have tons of negative karma from countless lives, so nobody has any room to point fingers at anyone else. In fact, it is very good karma to help someone like that. I'm just saying that perhaps our entire notion of justice needs a bit of reexamination. As has been pointed out here already, the justice system (whatever that may look like where you live) is often not about justice anyway and more often increases the harm done, like when the state executes someone for killing someone else. Instead of justice, that is providing each and every citizen of the state with the karma of killing another human. How is that justice?
The real problems are diverse and complicated, and they may be difficult or impossible to solve. In that sense it could be a smart thing to settle for the illusion of “justice” being done.
This may be the most wise thing anyone has said in this thread.
Palzang, even the Buddha said there were random acts of crime, and also weather phenomena, to name two categories of causes of suffering, that were not due to the karma of those suffering from those events, and that were completely random and not "caused" by the victims, i.e. weren't due to some sort of negligence that put the victim in harm's way. Random stuff does happen. It's not realistic to expect people to take personal responsibility for everything that happens to them. I don't have sutras at my fingertips, I can't quote scripture, but others on this forum have addressed this, which is where I learned about this teaching.
Life is really more complex than saying everyone is responsible for everything that happens to them. Certain examples would make that idea seem quite harsh. Are children included in this? What about child abuse? What about the long-term effects of childhood trauma, that can make people susceptible to mishaps later in life? Life can't be boiled down to a simple formula, IMO.
Palzang, even the Buddha said there were random acts of crime, and also weather phenomena, to name two categories of causes of suffering, that were not due to the karma of those suffering from those events, and that were completely random and not "caused" by the victims, i.e. weren't due to some sort of negligence that put the victim in harm's way. Random stuff does happen. It's not realistic to expect people to take personal responsibility for everything that happens to them. I don't have sutras at my fingertips, I can't quote scripture, but others on this forum have addressed this, which is where I learned about this teaching.
It sounds to me -- although perhaps this is not what he meant -- that Palzang is one who believes that karma is sort of a cosmic punishment. And if what appears to be a random act of violence happens to you, it is karma.
It sounds to me -- although perhaps this is not what he meant -- that Palzang is one who believes that karma is sort of a cosmic punishment. And if what appears to be a random act of violence happens to you, it is karma.
We had a thread months ago discussing random events and their relation to karma. Turns out the Buddha taught they fall outside the principle of karma.
I understand that in criminal situations, the legal system sets the punishment, but do you think that people seek to extract their own interpretation of justice beyond the law?
I'm sorry. I don't really understand that question.
I did word my question badly- sorry. I guess what I'm trying to explain is that sometimes the person who did wrong can pay the price but that still doesn't satisfy some people. They still want to extract more punishment beyond the law and will act on it. If they succeed in extracting "personal justice", they then become criminals that go unpunished. Their actions are a reversal of the original justice. They punished the "criminal" more than the crime merited.
It seems like some people will seek to punish anyone who holds a different point of view or writes a book that they don't like, etc. It seems that they want to have a "frontier" style justice system that allows them the freedom to threaten the person or ruin their life/business.
Social consciousness seems to be regressing in many societies which could affect our justice systems.
Apparently people didn't read my post thoroughly. I made a point of saying that I do not consider karma to be some sort of "cosmic punishment". Did you miss that? Karma is the law of cause and effect. If we wish to be happy, we then we must create the causes that produce happiness. It's really as simple as that. You can't grow apples from lemon seeds, nor can you produce happiness from planting seeds of hatred, greed and ignorance. While there may indeed be some instances where there are things that happen by chance, that is irrelevant to what I was talking about. If you bring up bad things that happen to children, then you obviously do not believe in the Buddha's teachings on cyclic existence. It's OK, you don't have to, but that is what the Buddha taught.
start examining our life as karmic reflection, as my teacher puts it. Only then can we empower ourselves to make the changes in our lives that result in happiness rather than continuing to revolve in cyclic existence forever and ever.
Again, that doesn't mean that when we see someone harming someone else that we shouldn't do anything about it or that we think the person receiving the attack somehow "deserves" it. That's not the lesson to be drawn here. We all "deserve" it (i.e. have created the causes for suffering) as we all have tons of negative karma from countless lives
This is what I find confusing from your earlier post.
"What the Buddha taught" with regard to the workings of karma and cyclic existence has been hotly debated here many times. "What the Buddha taught" in some respects seems to be very much in the eye of the beholder. The quote that comes up most often in these discussions is that the Buddha taught that the workings of karma are an "imponderable", being too complex to fathom by any but the Enlightened.
We must all be careful, or should all be careful, not to mix up the Buddha's revised teachings on karma and the Hindu teachings on karma. If you don't know the difference, look it up. That's all I'ma say for this thread.
I guess what I'm trying to explain is that sometimes the person who did wrong can pay the price but that still doesn't satisfy some people. They still want to extract more punishment beyond the law and will act on it. If they succeed in extracting "personal justice", they then become criminals that go unpunished. Their actions are a reversal of the original justice. They punished the "criminal" more than the crime merited.
It seems like some people will seek to punish anyone who holds a different point of view or writes a book that they don't like, etc. It seems that they want to have a "frontier" style justice system that allows them the freedom to threaten the person or ruin their life/business.
Social consciousness seems to be regressing in many societies which could affect our justice systems.
Okay, I think I understand now. Anger and fear have been growing; even in our relatively peaceful corner of the world. Their disguise as a “cry for justice” sometimes is too obvious.
I agree there is no such thing as justice, not in the way people are taught to think of it as some defined moral rule. In the same way, there is no karma, in the way many people see it as some cosmic law that brings justice to the universe. And it would be a terrible, brutal world if indeed justice ruled with an iron grip, for justice only means the death of mercy.
Let me explain.
Stripped of the pretty wrapping, justice is nothing but punishment. It's the payback for breaking whatever rules society places on their own behavior. Justice is nothing but the set of balancing scales that says the punishment fits the crime. "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" is justice. It defends the accused against even harsher punishment. Justice applied means the punishment fits the crime, no more. It's not two eyes for every eye you damage. Only one eye. It's a vast improvement over the old system where an insult could get your head chopped off.
It has a fatal flaw. If someone kills a thousand people, what is the just punishment? You can't kill a man a thousand times over. Is it justice to even kill him once? Suppose a man tortures people. Does justice demand we torture him back? A lot of people would say yes, and they would be right. Justice only says the punishment must fit the crime. If there is no punishment that fits the crime, then you do the best you can.
So where in this iron rule of punishment is mercy? For if justice means punishment equals the crime, then the punishment cannot be less than deserved, either. And that is what people are really wanting out of justice. Is the punishment too severe? A big yawn, unless it's someone you know and love. But let someone get less punishment? People rise up in anger. We want justice! So mercy is killed on the altar of justice.
May the Buddha save us all from a world ruled by justice.
What I also see as a problem with justice is the growing ego and sense of entitlement that is affecting too many people in society. Their perception of offense and the rights they have to punish others is out of proportion. I see signs of people willing taking justice into their own hands. Just observe how people behave in an out of control situation.
I don't think that justice has an energy of its own but rather reflects the energy of the society that implements it.
Comments
But what's the reality?
Ever been in a prison?
Ever been mugged in a dark alley?
Ever been raped?
Ever had your child molested?
Do you want a special prison with a modern rehabilitation program built in your neighborhood?
How about a halfway house for ex-cons in your neighborhood?
How about just an office where ex-cons have to check in monthly in your neighborhood?
And Simon, I'm not specifically asking this of you. But whenever these facilities need to be built, a hue and cry goes up in almost any city or town where they're proposed. And the reason is that many of these people are truly bad people who have done evil things against others. There are lots of people who deserve magnanimity. I'm not sure that hardened criminals are the people we should portion out our magnanimity to.
I once had one of the students, a Latino, come to me and ask me to help him get out of a gang in northern Virginia. I knew it was a task beyond my knowledge, but I did have contacts that could help. The kid (about age 14) had told me the only way to get out of the gang was to play Russian roulette. I made the appropriate contacts, and within 48 hours had someone at the school to help the kid work himself out of the gang. It was too late. No, the kid wasn't dead, but he had gotten himself out of the gang. I asked what he had to do. He said, "Mr. Lynch, I want you to trust me on this. You don't want to know because it would haunt you forever."
I'm sorry, I have no magnanimity for many, perhaps most, of the gang members whose initiations include the rape of minors or who force 14 year-olds to play Russian roulette...and worse. I want them deported or put behind bars. Period.
Now, for those for whom rehabilitation could likely be successful...all for it. I'm for reducing sentences for some types of crimes, and I'm for eliminating prison for some types of crimes/offenders. But there are hardened criminals...particularly those who are repeat offenders, who have given up any right to ask for compassion from the rest of society.
I take issue with our society and how we treat each other. Most old systems don't really work in the here and now. We have allowed criminals (white collar included) to organize and affect the very core of our society. I agree that anyone who enters this country and commits a crime should be deported with no chance of ever being granted citizenship. We need to tighten our immigration standards and deny entrance to anyone with a criminal record or criminal associations. I'm not picking on foreign born individuals, it's just that we already have a serious crime problem and don't need to invite more. It's also not fair to the law abiding immigrants.
We need to reevaluate our present prison system. We should separate the non violent prison population and keep them away from those who will teach them more. If prisoners are repeat offenders and have a violent record or are rapists/offenders- they should never be released into the general population.
I've read about some new programs where they have prisoners training dogs and horses that are to be used in special needs programs. The object is to have them bond with another living being and learn a quality that they lack- patience. Who knows, this may make a difference for some of the prisoners. I don't have enough information to go on.
We need preventative action with our young people to keep them from joining gangs. Look at the massages they get from pop culture. It's all about materialism, violence, sex and short on anything of real value. It's not just the criminal culture that is causing this. We have young people who are encouraged to have high self esteem. This has been a buzz word in the schools as the end all be all cure for everything wrong with the kids. You have experience in the educational field- have you implemented programs like these? Traditionally, didn't self esteem result from accomplishment? Doesn't it require kids to struggle to master a skill and then feel the natural sense of pride and satisfaction from their hard work? Now, everyone gets a prize- just for showing up. If we could reach the kids at an early age, see where their talents and passions are and make it possible for those children to pursue them; wouldn't that be better in the long run? Wouldn't there be more focus in the child's life? I understand that many parents are too disengaged be helpful to their children, but what can we do? Do you support the present emphasis on standardized testing? Is this a cookie cutter model offering a one size fits all or is it failing to help? My children have been out of school for many years, so I'm not up on the present state of affairs in the educational system.
At the risk of sounding warm and fuzzy- I believe, with all my heart, that we need to be very conscious of how we treat each other. The escalation of the violence and insensitivity prevalent in our culture is causing enormous harm on all levels. What we see happening is the fruit of what we sow.
My middle school had a number of programs that we felt encouraged students to develop high self-esteem. My staff was too tightly wound around the "only highest accomplishment deserves praise" model. This became problematic because we were a gifted center, so about a third of our students were gifted-talented. That was fine for them...they excelled in Math Counts, Debating, Science Olympiad, and so forth. But the other 2/3 of the school never measured up to the GT kids, so few teachers could be persuaded to tackle the self-esteem issues some of those kids had. It was a constant struggle to motivate those teachers.
And that's why I do approve of some kind of standardized testing program. WHen teachers' success depends on their success with ALL students, suddenly the climate begins to change. We had a nationally recognized speaker in one day who had been a high school principal. He had had a biology teacher who always claimed to be the best in the school out of about 3...until the standardized test scores came back and he had the worst results. Things changed.
I also had an opportunity to have a distinguished Black professor from Howard University speak to our faculty. He talked about his background -- grew up poor in the ghettos of NW D.C. And he said to my teachers -- "You want a poor Black kid to have high self esteem. Don't give him empty praise. Teach him to read and write.
This was also echoed when I had a chance for a sit-down meeting with Julian Bond of the NAACP.
I agree with you, also, regarding the pop-culture and gangsta-culture. Total insensitivity toward others. Offensive language, violence and sex in the music, violent degradation in the images of that culture. Certainly not right thought and right speech.
Too many people have little knowledge or appreciation for the work it takes for us to have this lifestyle. Of course, the economy needs to improve so that there are jobs for future generations. I think that it's a combination of test results and student performance all year that helps evaluate teachers and class material. I have read stories about teachers preparing classes for those tests and negating any true measure of their effectiveness. I don't know if that's widespread or not. It's not just the kids- it's the adults, too. We have such a fake culture. Excesses in plastic surgery= fake beauty. Drugs that enhance performance = fake athletes/stars. Excessive debt= fake wealth. Cheating= fake intelligence, qualifications. And on and on.
I believe that at any moment there is the right, compassionate action. The next moment, or the prior one, that action is likely to be different. The "trick" is to know what that is for you, right here and right now. That's all that matters: if right now I see suffering, how to alleviate it and do what is necessary to alleviate it, there is no need for me to wrap my head about some mental concept.
The Talion principle ("an eye for an eye") was quite an innovation in a society where the punishment was usually far more severe than the crime. Alternatively, you may want to consider the ancient Welsh code of laws or the Irish Brehon laws with their system of fines rather than judicial murder and imprisonment.
In the US, I understand that there is now a prison regime which, to my mind, goes against all principles of justice and equity by imposing silent, solitary confinement which are outlawed in most civilised societies.
As Buddhists, I think we need to be very careful of condemning others for actions whose seeds we can notice within ourselves. We also need to remember that, at its heart, Buddhism teaches that each one of us can learn to walk the Noble Eightfold Path, no matter where we start from. The recidivism figures demonstrate very clearly that the 'justice system' is inadequate for the purpose of creating good, happy and co-operative people, serving only as concentration camps.
I don't want to derail this thread and risk having it closed. Here are some stats:
http://www.usillegalaliens.com/impacts_of_illegal_immigration_crime_summary.html
It does not take much study of the Dharma to realise that the whole idea of countries and nations is a gigantic con trick perpetuated by the powerful and imposed on the poor. Just as Buddhism in India is a way out of the caste system, I maintain that nationalism should be shrugged off when we Take Refuge. The result is that we understand our connectedness to all others, including particularly those who are in need. This, I would suggest, is at the very basis of any sense of justice and why I said that that if it is not equal it is not justice.
If we try it your way, what happens to the quality of life? How long before we all live in third world conditions and the powerful become richer and more powerful? What causes these other countries to have only the rich and poor? What causes the oppressive living conditions? Wouldn't it be better to address those issues to help people thrive and have a better life?
Can you avoid all of this by taking refuge? I don't mean any offense but I've long been told that all I had to do was have faith and pray and any problems would be resolved. It didn't and isn't taking refuge the same thing?
Of course I do understand the concerns about the problems we face. You are quite right that our style of life (what you terms "quality of life") will have to change. Isn't that justice? Where some have more than they need and others die for want is that not inevitable? After all, understanding, whether as a Buddhist or as an historian, that no empire, republic or system lasts indefinitely, we would do well to make friends with our poor neighbours: who knows when they may become the owners?
I am certainly not suggesting that Taking Refuge or meditation or studying the sutras or any other specifically Buddhist practice will fill empty bellies or cure the sick. It is as repellent an idea to me as similar words, mutatis mutandis, from Christians or Muslims or capitalists. I believe in "Buddhism with its sleeves rolled up", active in the world for the relief of suffering wherever it exists.
This is precisely what I mean by "justice", a far wider scope than simply the application of a code of laws.
Yes, empires rise and fall. How can we be sure that any new empire that arises will value justice? When people and cultures are so disconnected from one another, how can they practice justice based on resentment, hate, envy, or vengeance? How do you prevent large numbers of people migrating to other areas from becoming a new age of colonialism? That never goes horribly wrong, does it?
You're response of "We take risks" sounds sort of like "whatever". Maybe you could go out on a limb, take a risk, and give us a more profound response. That's the kind of response that I expect from a disengaged teenager at a fast food place when I tell him that he got my order wrong and he says, "Whatever...." for handing me a Big Mac instead of a salad. :whatever:
I think we're probably all agreed that in a truly just world, the type of neglect, abuse, and illiteracy that are some of the prime causes of people becoming lost and running afoul of the criminal justice system wouldn't exist. And that those criminals who are capable of being rehabilitated would receive rehabilitation and job training. The question is, what about those who for whatever reason, aren't able to become rehabilitated? And what about violent criminals who do go through rehabilitation? Would any of us want any of them living down the street? Could we trust the system (the rehabilitation and evaluation of prisoners completing such programs) enough to feel comfortable with formerly violent people living next door?
I have not read any of these books, but I'm interested in what you would like to say about them. "Justice" seems to be a concept open to interpretation. I have a particular interest in the Greek laws on Hubris. If we had such a system in place today, I imagine that our politicians and celebrities would be held to much higher standards.
I'm sorry you think that my answer was dismissive. It is, after all, half a century since I was a teenager! When I said that we have to take risks what I mean is that we have to stop doing things the way we have been doing them: we can see the results of our age-old behaviours and yet we carry on repeating them - a pretty good definition of madness.
The risks we have to take are to dismantle the barriers we have created, such as frontiers, which keep the poor away from the resources which would empower them. Disempowering the poor and the weak is the ultimate injustice. This is the heart of the story about the Samaritan rescuer: he took risks on a dangerous road to help an enemy, where the injured man's own people avoided him.
As a Buddhist, I believe in our connectedness in all directions and all times to all that is. The consequence is that, even if as this thread has suggested, there is no 'justice' in a world where bad things happen to good people, we are called and challenged, as individuals, to act justly and equitably towards all sentient beings and the world at large.
I'm not a Buddhist but I do value the principles and try to apply them to my life. I think that there is a power greater than us all but nothing like the deity revered by organized religions. I do believe that we are all connected, too. That's what makes our thoughts, words, and actions so very important because of how they affect others as well as ourselves. We can only expect true justice when all people desire truth and justice in equal measure for all instead of manipulated, poor reproductions of these key values.
So, to return to the OP's assertion that there is no such thing as "justice", I would most strongly deny it. It is we, you and I and anyone who cares enough to speak and act for it, that create justice. It is not some great monolith, unchanging and eternal or, if it is, it is outwith our comprehension. It is a pattern that we impose on the world, a story we tell ourselves and hand on to our children.
There is such a thing as justice because we make it so.
I acknowledged there’s some wiring in our brain which makes us susceptible for this kind of illusion…
It probably had some evolutionary benefit.
My main focus was criminal justice. We are prone to feel that inflicting suffering on a person is “just” because of what he did. And I know the feeling well, trust me.
But I think this feeling of “justice” is really just anger in disguise. The talk of “justice” is a rationalization of anger and fear.
The Buddhist approach is the compassionate one. Compassion is for all people including the criminal specimens.
Inflicting suffering and labeling it “justice” gives a false sense of closure.
Nothing is repaired; nothing is settled when the murderer is executed.
This false sense of closure stops us from looking at the real problems.
The real problems are diverse and complicated, and they may be difficult or impossible to solve.
In that sense it could be a smart thing to settle for the illusion of “justice” being done.
Again, that doesn't mean that when we see someone harming someone else that we shouldn't do anything about it or that we think the person receiving the attack somehow "deserves" it. That's not the lesson to be drawn here. We all "deserve" it (i.e. have created the causes for suffering) as we all have tons of negative karma from countless lives, so nobody has any room to point fingers at anyone else. In fact, it is very good karma to help someone like that. I'm just saying that perhaps our entire notion of justice needs a bit of reexamination. As has been pointed out here already, the justice system (whatever that may look like where you live) is often not about justice anyway and more often increases the harm done, like when the state executes someone for killing someone else. Instead of justice, that is providing each and every citizen of the state with the karma of killing another human. How is that justice?
Palzang
Life is really more complex than saying everyone is responsible for everything that happens to them. Certain examples would make that idea seem quite harsh. Are children included in this? What about child abuse? What about the long-term effects of childhood trauma, that can make people susceptible to mishaps later in life? Life can't be boiled down to a simple formula, IMO.
It seems like some people will seek to punish anyone who holds a different point of view or writes a book that they don't like, etc. It seems that they want to have a "frontier" style justice system that allows them the freedom to threaten the person or ruin their life/business.
Social consciousness seems to be regressing in many societies which could affect our justice systems.
Palzang
Anger and fear have been growing; even in our relatively peaceful corner of the world.
Their disguise as a “cry for justice” sometimes is too obvious.
:wow:
Let me explain.
Stripped of the pretty wrapping, justice is nothing but punishment. It's the payback for breaking whatever rules society places on their own behavior. Justice is nothing but the set of balancing scales that says the punishment fits the crime. "An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" is justice. It defends the accused against even harsher punishment. Justice applied means the punishment fits the crime, no more. It's not two eyes for every eye you damage. Only one eye. It's a vast improvement over the old system where an insult could get your head chopped off.
It has a fatal flaw. If someone kills a thousand people, what is the just punishment? You can't kill a man a thousand times over. Is it justice to even kill him once? Suppose a man tortures people. Does justice demand we torture him back? A lot of people would say yes, and they would be right. Justice only says the punishment must fit the crime. If there is no punishment that fits the crime, then you do the best you can.
So where in this iron rule of punishment is mercy? For if justice means punishment equals the crime, then the punishment cannot be less than deserved, either. And that is what people are really wanting out of justice. Is the punishment too severe? A big yawn, unless it's someone you know and love. But let someone get less punishment? People rise up in anger. We want justice! So mercy is killed on the altar of justice.
May the Buddha save us all from a world ruled by justice.
What I also see as a problem with justice is the growing ego and sense of entitlement that is affecting too many people in society. Their perception of offense and the rights they have to punish others is out of proportion. I see signs of people willing taking justice into their own hands. Just observe how people behave in an out of control situation.
I don't think that justice has an energy of its own but rather reflects the energy of the society that implements it.