I’m feeling the stress from the ideological battles being waged. Here’s my take on the wrong kind of justice. I hope that you’ll be interested enough to continue:
Our world is in a mess at the moment. There is a major schism happening in society that is fragmenting the world that we know. In this world, there are three distinct factions of people:
- The privileged few who use the system to keep obtaining further privileges;
- The majority who try to follow the system, and end up dealing with status quo and little return;
- The few who use whatever methods they deem necessary to affect changes to the status quo, typically to their own personal detriment.
The rare few belong to the first group, don’t have much to complain about, and don’t want anything to change. Most of us belong to the second group, hoping that change will somehow happen without rocking the boat of status quo. It doesn’t. It seems that in order for that to happen, we need the third group of people: the rebels, the non-conformists, the revolutionaries, the counterculturists, and the individualists. They’re known by so many names, but the only one that I refuse to use is the maverick. Politicians and stars have used it to death and negated the true meaning of that word to the point of ridicule. So, it’s out of my book.
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Merriam-Webster Definition: Nonconformist – a person who does not conform to a generally accepted pattern of thought or action;
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
We’re starting to see the visible trails of these rebels who are trying to let the rest of us know that something stinks in Gotham. If you think about it, we are starting to resemble that mythical world inhabited by Batman and his adversaries. And Batman is an appropriate hero/misfit who is a flawed individual with high ideals. Sound familiar?
I give you two examples of individuals who are trying to unveil the corruption that’s being perpetrated by socially-accepted institutions and warped societal norms. We would like to believe the fairytale that these formal institutions are beyond reproach because they do not break any laws, but reality isn’t showing us the true picture. Read the news and you’ll see them getting off for some heinous crimes affecting millions of people with barely a slap on the wrist. How is this right, and why are we just accepting this? Our current legal structure has been tampered with to the level that it doesn’t resemble what the original lawmakers had created. And while these institutional felons go unpunished, the “common folk” get placed in jail for minor violations because getting off is beyond their means. This inequality doesn’t reflect a healthy society.
 |
 |
| Tim De Christopher vs. Federal Government | Keith Downey vs’ Federal Government |
Here’s an important excerpt from each story as spoken by the prosecutor, the U.S. Government:
Tim De Christopher’s case: “The government’s memorandum states, ‘As opposed to preventing this particular defendant from committing further crimes, the sentence should be crafted ‘to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct’ by others.’”
Keith Downey’s case: “A federal law enforcement official, who would not be named because he was not authorized to speak about an active case, argued that denial-of-service attacks like the one against PayPal were costly and illegal: ‘These things are costing companies millions of dollars.’ The official acknowledged that some of those arrested ‘used unsophisticated techniques.’ But when asked if the authorities were overreacting, he said, ‘No, it’s never heavy-handed to address violations of law, particularly in this arena of cybersecurity, where the threat is so pervasive.’”
The perception of morality is up to each individual. But we have to remember that even our socially-accepted institutions and norms are applied by flawed human beings. They make the choice to see the law as black and white, but only when it’s convenient for specific perpetrators and their own end means. If they are the judge, jury, and executioner of these perpetrators, then what is the purpose of a jury system by our peers? If our system doesn’t allow for a method of protest or correction for what we deem inappropriate in a timely manner, then are we to simply just sit back and take their decision? Maybe that institution will wise up to the error of their ways. I wouldn’t hold my breath on that happening any time soon. It seems that many of these cases are stacked against those who are brave enough to question the validity of status quo. Yet, their reward is that society deems them misfits and puts them away in a jail system that will negatively impact any purported rehabilitation. Someone has got to watch the watchers, especially when it’s being proven in our daily news that these watchers are in violation of those same norms that they so vehemently defend. It seems that our state of hypocrisy knows no bounds.
