3 ms·
I think this proposal is an incredibly naive way of viewing the world. A mob by definition is unpredictable. A mob is inherently incapable of meting out justic
by brianchu 14y ago
I think this proposal is an incredibly naive way of viewing the world.
A mob by definition is unpredictable. A mob is inherently incapable of meting out justice, it can only mete out indiscriminate punishment. A mob is susceptible to the words of a demagogue, even if those words are lies. People will always try to manipulate the mob to their own advantage.
Where does the concept of having a trial come into this proposal of mob justice? How will a mob, a concept of organization that is based entirely on conformity and the emotion of anger, be able to hold a fair trial? I don't think there has ever been a case in history in which a mob of people have held a fair trial and carried out a fair punishment.
Sure, in an ideal world mobs would be capable of being fair; however, we don't live in an ideal world. We live in a world where people are irrational and where the mob suppresses rational discussion by suppressing dissent.
Furthermore, there is something self-contradictory about a mob destroying people who destroy. A well-functioning system of justice can never be built on retribution and violence.
The idea of a mob pitching in to hire enforcers is even more ridiculous. Now what you have is a gang. Even if under this proposal these mobs eventually institutionalize into the "police" and "courts," there is now the problem of corruption.