4 ms·

I suspect that none of the European countries to the eastern side of the Iron Curtain retained feudal law, or much of the "legacy" law in general. That, I guess

I suspect that none of the European countries to the eastern side of the Iron Curtain retained feudal law, or much of the "legacy" law in general. That, I guess, is one of the few potential upsides of any revolution: an opportunity arises to just throw away a lot of pre-existing arrangements and re-draw them anew in (hopefully) more sensible way. Of course, the quality of the new design and/or its implementation is not guaranteed, results may vary.

toyg 5y ago
Big Rewrite, everyone!
mytailorisrich 5y ago
That's exactly what happened in France. Napoleon (and the Republic before him) had the law rewritten [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleonic_Code https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleonic_Code
oblio 5y ago
And the rewrite process might include beheading, hanging or shooting some of the old API endpoints.
- Joker_vD 5y ago
  As is usual: it's not like the Inclosure Acts were met with unbridled enthusiasm from the rural folk. On the contrary, there were revolts and subsequent hanging of the unruly peasants.
mschuster91 5y ago
> I suspect that none of the European countries to the eastern side of the Iron Curtain retained feudal law, or much of the "legacy" law in general. Rather make that "no country other than the US and UK+Commonwealth countries". These two countries are probably the only ones in the world that haven't suffered any kind of comprehensive revolution in the last 100 years, and it shows. Not just in the absurd amount of precedence cases or the existence of "case law" in general, but also in issues that directly impact the functioning of democracy (i.e. US voting being on Tuesdays because back 200 years ago Sunday was for church visits, Monday for traveling on horseback to the voting booth and Wednesday back home - made sense back then, nowadays it serves as a very effective tool to disenfranchise poor people from voting) or threaten the foundations of the existence of life (hundreds years old water claims that nowhere near closely reflect the actual cost of the water, leading to farmers and Nestle running unsustainable operations just "because they're allowed" without thinking if what they're doing can permanently destroy aquifers). Every other country has had all that historical baggage unceremoniously dropped.
- sologoub 5y ago
  You do realize revolutions usually involve killing people and all kinds of other violence? The price for “unceremoniously dropping” what you consider historical baggage are real lives and livelihoods of not just those you deem undesirable or unfair, but more often than not regular folks caught in the middle. If you want these laws changed then vote, run for office, work on a movement. Channel that energy productively instead of destructively. Change is possible peacefully, but of course a “revolution” sounds way cooler.
- Ichthypresbyter 5y ago
  A lot of countries in Western Europe haven't had a revolution since the early 19th century. Yes, many of them were briefly occupied by the Nazis, but after liberation the pre-war constitution was reinstated. For instance, the Dutch still claim that their Constitution dates from 1815 (though it has been substantially rewritten several times, most recently in 1983). The reason why courts in the Anglosphere rely so much on precedent and case law while those in Continental Europe and its former colonies don't isn't a lack of revolutions (except insofar as Napoleon would have replaced common law with the Code Napoleon had he made it across the Channel). It's that legal codes developed differently in England and in the rest of Europe in the medieval period.
  - oblio 5y ago
    > For instance, the Dutch still claim that their Constitution dates from 1815 (though it has been substantially rewritten several times, most recently in 1983). Peaceful rewrites are good. Treating Constitutions as holy texts is a problem.
- djrogers 5y ago
  > nowadays it serves as a very effective tool to disenfranchise poor people from voting Which is one reason that your entire premise is largely false today. Early voting and mail-in voting is a thing pretty much everywhere now, going on the last day of voting to vote in person is an option, but not required.
- bonzini 5y ago

toyg 5y ago

Big Rewrite, everyone!

mytailorisrich 5y ago

That's exactly what happened in France. Napoleon (and the Republic before him) had the law rewritten [1] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleonic_Code https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleonic_Code

oblio 5y ago

And the rewrite process might include beheading, hanging or shooting some of the old API endpoints.

Joker_vD 5y ago
As is usual: it's not like the Inclosure Acts were met with unbridled enthusiasm from the rural folk. On the contrary, there were revolts and subsequent hanging of the unruly peasants.

mschuster91 5y ago

> I suspect that none of the European countries to the eastern side of the Iron Curtain retained feudal law, or much of the "legacy" law in general. Rather make that "no country other than the US and UK+Commonwealth countries". These two countries are probably the only ones in the world that haven't suffered any kind of comprehensive revolution in the last 100 years, and it shows. Not just in the absurd amount of precedence cases or the existence of "case law" in general, but also in issues that directly impact the functioning of democracy (i.e. US voting being on Tuesdays because back 200 years ago Sunday was for church visits, Monday for traveling on horseback to the voting booth and Wednesday back home - made sense back then, nowadays it serves as a very effective tool to disenfranchise poor people from voting) or threaten the foundations of the existence of life (hundreds years old water claims that nowhere near closely reflect the actual cost of the water, leading to farmers and Nestle running unsustainable operations just "because they're allowed" without thinking if what they're doing can permanently destroy aquifers). Every other country has had all that historical baggage unceremoniously dropped.

sologoub 5y ago
You do realize revolutions usually involve killing people and all kinds of other violence? The price for “unceremoniously dropping” what you consider historical baggage are real lives and livelihoods of not just those you deem undesirable or unfair, but more often than not regular folks caught in the middle. If you want these laws changed then vote, run for office, work on a movement. Channel that energy productively instead of destructively. Change is possible peacefully, but of course a “revolution” sounds way cooler.
Ichthypresbyter 5y ago
A lot of countries in Western Europe haven't had a revolution since the early 19th century. Yes, many of them were briefly occupied by the Nazis, but after liberation the pre-war constitution was reinstated. For instance, the Dutch still claim that their Constitution dates from 1815 (though it has been substantially rewritten several times, most recently in 1983). The reason why courts in the Anglosphere rely so much on precedent and case law while those in Continental Europe and its former colonies don't isn't a lack of revolutions (except insofar as Napoleon would have replaced common law with the Code Napoleon had he made it across the Channel). It's that legal codes developed differently in England and in the rest of Europe in the medieval period.
- oblio 5y ago
  > For instance, the Dutch still claim that their Constitution dates from 1815 (though it has been substantially rewritten several times, most recently in 1983). Peaceful rewrites are good. Treating Constitutions as holy texts is a problem.
djrogers 5y ago
> nowadays it serves as a very effective tool to disenfranchise poor people from voting Which is one reason that your entire premise is largely false today. Early voting and mail-in voting is a thing pretty much everywhere now, going on the last day of voting to vote in person is an option, but not required.
bonzini 5y ago