4 ms·

don't take it literally, my friend, tho you understand the point (hopefully).

• munificent 2y ago
  I truly do not. I understand the desire for justice, but I honestly don't even know what "justice" means when the actor involved is a state. This is, I think, one of the fundamental challenges of the modern world. We've gotten so good at building huge organizations of people (states, corporations, etc.) that can harness the efforts of thousands or millions of people. But the result incredibly powerful entity has a diffusion of responsibility that confounds our notions of morality, right, wrong, and justice, which were all developed under the assumption that the primary actor is a person.
  • Davidzheng 2y ago
    But isn't the problem that the state produces so much good as well as the bad. If the moral scale were so clear-cut, then being a state or not does not really excuse at all. Many people can image what justice can be for ISIS or Nazi germany for example. It is maybe a similar question as when you ask how should Google, Apple, or Amazon be punished when they violate laws/behave in bad faith.
    • munificent 2y ago
      > But isn't the problem that the state produces so much good as well as the bad. Yes, that's definitely part of the problem. How do you evaluate the overall goodness of an organization that does thousands of things, some helpful, some harmful?