12 ms·

“If a law is unjust a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so” - Thomas Jefferson

by l0ng1nu5 2y ago

Aloisius 2y ago
He tried to have multiple people murdered.
- lupusreal 2y ago
  Jefferson did, certainly. He was instrumental in starting a war from what I understand. Ross though? The government alleged it but never bothered to prove it. Furthermore the government agents involved were laughably corrupt, so anything they alleged needs to be taken with a massive grain of salt. For all anybody here know, they fabricated the entire assassination story to distract the public from their plot to loot Ross's money (which unlike the assassination stuff, has been proven in court.)
mmcwilliams 2y ago
Thomas Jefferson was a slave owner.
- l0ng1nu5 2y ago
  So were most aristocrats of the time. Applying presentism doesn't invalidate the idea.
  - seanmcdirmid 2y ago
    It is just hypocritical: even his time most people knew slavery was unjust.
  - mmcwilliams 2y ago
    But there were also abolitionists at the time, even amongst that class. Jefferson not being among them does, actually, diminish his standing and his views on justice. This quote, for example, does not acknowledge that there are also laws which are unjust to obey; such as the owning of human beings in chattel slavery.
  - leptons 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - pizza 2y ago
    I don’t think suggesting that his quote would imply his slaves would be justified in violating their own enslavement is any kind of presentism.
  - DonHopkins 2y ago
    [flagged]
  - DannyBee 2y ago
    He never actually said it, either.
- arrowsmith 2y ago
  … in a society where slavery was legal, widespread, and rarely questioned. Murder has never been legal.
  - mmcwilliams 2y ago
    The legality of it is not in question (the purpose of this quote). It was as unjust then as it is now.
adriand 2y ago
Is it unjust to prohibit the sale of illegal drugs, weapons, etc.? Society has good reasons for regulating certain goods. I regularly see people in my community who are enslaved by fentanyl and I wouldn’t wish it on my worst enemy. The society I live in decided to make selling it illegal. What is unjust about that?
- ndriscoll 2y ago
  There are healthier middle grounds we could explore where e.g. advertisements are banned and individuals could register themselves as being banned from participating in certain addictive vices because they don't consistently have the willpower to quit or don't want to tempt fate trying it (and make it a crime to sell to an individual who has voluntarily banned themselves), but it's hard to argue that The War on Drugs has been in any way just. I expect in such a society, certain groups (e.g. Mormons) would normalize banning yourself from vices the day you turn 18.
- l0ng1nu5 2y ago
  As I recall weapons weren't permitted on the platform. The society didn't decide, the ruling class decided to use drug policy to attack their own citizens. History shows that prohibition is an abject failure. The fent epidemic is symptomatic of this failed policy. If they actually cared about the epidemic, addicts would have access to regulated, pharmaceutical grade heroin whilst also having ready access to treatment. But then we'd have empty prisons and the police would be free to solve real crimes so we can't have that.
  - jsheard 2y ago
    Is Trump pushing for broad drug decriminalisation? I feel like that would be necessary for this pardon to make sense on the basis of current drug laws being unjust. Last I heard he was promising to make drug dealers eligible for the death penalty: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/trump-wants-expand-federal-death-penalty-setting-legal-challenges-seco-rcna178979 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/trump-wants-e...
    - 2y ago
clueless 2y ago
so we all individually can just decide a law is unjust? that'll be fun
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- DannyBee 2y ago
  Don't worry - jefferson never actually said this because he wasn't a complete idiot. Don't take my word for it though, the monticello folks looked into it too - https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jefferson-encyclopedia/if-law-unjustspurious-quotation/ https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jeffers... It is a fun quote though, because it's one of those quotes that people want to use to justify their own dumb behavior. "If you don't like the law, feel free to ignore it" - Albert Einstein
- jojobas 2y ago
  If you come to disagree with the justice of a law, your options are to conform or, yes, decide that the law is unjust.
- XorNot 2y ago
  I mean strictly speaking the people voted for Trump, so collectively they're all okay with this. Of course Trump's platform was enormously based on law & order and combatting the drug trade, which he seems to think should still be actually illegal and is not ending the war on drugs so, I don't know - make of that what you will.
bdangubic 2y ago
lol
DannyBee 2y ago
1. There is no evidence jefferson ever said this 2. There is no evidence anyone else ever said this, either The closest you get is MLK. See https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jefferson-encyclopedia/if-law-unjustspurious-quotation/ https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jeffers... But MLK also talks about moral obligation and not other forms of obligation. He was not trying to create a free for all where everyone gets to decide which laws are okay or not, because he (and jefferson) were not complete morons.
- scythe 2y ago
  MLK was himself referencing Saint Augustine: >Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that "an unjust law is no law at all." Considering that his rhetoric was very much based on Christianity, it's clear what standard of "unjust" he was applying.
  - dragonwriter 2y ago
    > Considering that his rhetoric was very much based on Christianity, it's clear what standard of "unjust" he was applying. Considering the diversity of standards of justice within the history of Christianity (which, in just the US, includes—relevant to this topic—MLK, sure, but also the Southern Baptist Convention, founded explicitly in support of slavery), I don't know that having rhetoric grounded in Christian theology tells much of substance about the standard of justice one is appealing to.
- l0ng1nu5 2y ago
  Touche, however there is plenty of evidence of people throughout history making this assertion, including MLK. He was trying to create a more just, egalitarian society. I don't understand how you can consider acting in accordance with leading research on successful drug policy "moronic"?
  - nateglims 2y ago
    Successful drug policy meaning what here?
lq9AJ8yrfs 2y ago
Maybe Thoreau? That's more authentic and gets at similar themes. On more than one level considering his circumstances and run-ins with law enforcement. ”Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison."
silverquiet 2y ago
I wonder how this sentiment is going to play out in Luigi Mangione's trial.

“If a law is unjust a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so” - Thomas Jefferson

Aloisius 2y ago

He tried to have multiple people murdered.

lupusreal 2y ago
Jefferson did, certainly. He was instrumental in starting a war from what I understand. Ross though? The government alleged it but never bothered to prove it. Furthermore the government agents involved were laughably corrupt, so anything they alleged needs to be taken with a massive grain of salt. For all anybody here know, they fabricated the entire assassination story to distract the public from their plot to loot Ross's money (which unlike the assassination stuff, has been proven in court.)

mmcwilliams 2y ago

Thomas Jefferson was a slave owner.

l0ng1nu5 2y ago
So were most aristocrats of the time. Applying presentism doesn't invalidate the idea.
- seanmcdirmid 2y ago
  It is just hypocritical: even his time most people knew slavery was unjust.
- mmcwilliams 2y ago
  But there were also abolitionists at the time, even amongst that class. Jefferson not being among them does, actually, diminish his standing and his views on justice. This quote, for example, does not acknowledge that there are also laws which are unjust to obey; such as the owning of human beings in chattel slavery.
- leptons 2y ago
  [flagged]
- pizza 2y ago
  I don’t think suggesting that his quote would imply his slaves would be justified in violating their own enslavement is any kind of presentism.
- DonHopkins 2y ago
  [flagged]
- DannyBee 2y ago
  He never actually said it, either.
arrowsmith 2y ago
… in a society where slavery was legal, widespread, and rarely questioned. Murder has never been legal.
- mmcwilliams 2y ago
  The legality of it is not in question (the purpose of this quote). It was as unjust then as it is now.

adriand 2y ago

Is it unjust to prohibit the sale of illegal drugs, weapons, etc.? Society has good reasons for regulating certain goods. I regularly see people in my community who are enslaved by fentanyl and I wouldn’t wish it on my worst enemy. The society I live in decided to make selling it illegal. What is unjust about that?

ndriscoll 2y ago
There are healthier middle grounds we could explore where e.g. advertisements are banned and individuals could register themselves as being banned from participating in certain addictive vices because they don't consistently have the willpower to quit or don't want to tempt fate trying it (and make it a crime to sell to an individual who has voluntarily banned themselves), but it's hard to argue that The War on Drugs has been in any way just. I expect in such a society, certain groups (e.g. Mormons) would normalize banning yourself from vices the day you turn 18.
l0ng1nu5 2y ago
As I recall weapons weren't permitted on the platform. The society didn't decide, the ruling class decided to use drug policy to attack their own citizens. History shows that prohibition is an abject failure. The fent epidemic is symptomatic of this failed policy. If they actually cared about the epidemic, addicts would have access to regulated, pharmaceutical grade heroin whilst also having ready access to treatment. But then we'd have empty prisons and the police would be free to solve real crimes so we can't have that.
- jsheard 2y ago
  Is Trump pushing for broad drug decriminalisation? I feel like that would be necessary for this pardon to make sense on the basis of current drug laws being unjust. Last I heard he was promising to make drug dealers eligible for the death penalty: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/trump-wants-expand-federal-death-penalty-setting-legal-challenges-seco-rcna178979 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/trump-wants-e...
  - 2y ago

clueless 2y ago

so we all individually can just decide a law is unjust? that'll be fun

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
DannyBee 2y ago
Don't worry - jefferson never actually said this because he wasn't a complete idiot. Don't take my word for it though, the monticello folks looked into it too - https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jefferson-encyclopedia/if-law-unjustspurious-quotation/ https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jeffers... It is a fun quote though, because it's one of those quotes that people want to use to justify their own dumb behavior. "If you don't like the law, feel free to ignore it" - Albert Einstein
jojobas 2y ago
If you come to disagree with the justice of a law, your options are to conform or, yes, decide that the law is unjust.
XorNot 2y ago
I mean strictly speaking the people voted for Trump, so collectively they're all okay with this. Of course Trump's platform was enormously based on law & order and combatting the drug trade, which he seems to think should still be actually illegal and is not ending the war on drugs so, I don't know - make of that what you will.

bdangubic 2y ago

lol

DannyBee 2y ago

1. There is no evidence jefferson ever said this 2. There is no evidence anyone else ever said this, either The closest you get is MLK. See https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jefferson-encyclopedia/if-law-unjustspurious-quotation/ https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jeffers... But MLK also talks about moral obligation and not other forms of obligation. He was not trying to create a free for all where everyone gets to decide which laws are okay or not, because he (and jefferson) were not complete morons.

scythe 2y ago
MLK was himself referencing Saint Augustine: >Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that "an unjust law is no law at all." Considering that his rhetoric was very much based on Christianity, it's clear what standard of "unjust" he was applying.
- dragonwriter 2y ago
  > Considering that his rhetoric was very much based on Christianity, it's clear what standard of "unjust" he was applying. Considering the diversity of standards of justice within the history of Christianity (which, in just the US, includes—relevant to this topic—MLK, sure, but also the Southern Baptist Convention, founded explicitly in support of slavery), I don't know that having rhetoric grounded in Christian theology tells much of substance about the standard of justice one is appealing to.
l0ng1nu5 2y ago
Touche, however there is plenty of evidence of people throughout history making this assertion, including MLK. He was trying to create a more just, egalitarian society. I don't understand how you can consider acting in accordance with leading research on successful drug policy "moronic"?
- nateglims 2y ago
  Successful drug policy meaning what here?

lq9AJ8yrfs 2y ago

Maybe Thoreau? That's more authentic and gets at similar themes. On more than one level considering his circumstances and run-ins with law enforcement. ”Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison."

silverquiet 2y ago

I wonder how this sentiment is going to play out in Luigi Mangione's trial.