The Illusion Of Equality: Laws And Tyranny

The notion of when laws do not apply equally, tyranny ensues, is a concept that has been explored by various philosophers and political thinkers throughout history, including Thomas Aquinas, Plato, Aristotle, Polybius, Niccolò Machiavelli, and Thomas Jefferson. The core idea is that when a ruler or government enforces laws selectively, favouring certain individuals or groups over others, it leads to an abuse of power and the subjugation of those who are not afforded the same protections. This selective application of the law is often justified by appealing to the public good, national security, or the ruler's interpretation of divine will. However, when laws are applied unequally, it undermines the very foundation of a just society and can lead to oppression, injustice, and cruelty.

Laws that are applied unequally are a form of tyranny, as per Prof Susan Hirsch

Laws that are applied unequally are a form of tyranny, according to Prof Susan Hirsch, a cultural anthropologist and professor of Conflict Resolution and Anthropology at George Mason University. Hirsch's scholarship focuses on law in relation to conflict, international and transitional justice, legal integration and religious minorities, environmental justice, and feminist approaches to law and conflict.

In her work, Hirsch highlights the "one rule for them" approach that manifests within political elites, which results in unequal application of laws. She asserts that when laws are applied unequally, it is a "classic case of tyranny". This statement has been featured on merchandise, such as t-shirts and mugs, spreading her message to a wider audience.

Hirsch's perspective on the unequal application of laws aligns with her broader research interests. For instance, her current book project proposes an approach to the rule of law that is tailored to conflict resolution. Additionally, her field research in Malta and Kenya resulted in publications on the rule of law and the legal integration of religious minorities.

Through her work and merchandise, Hirsch draws attention to the issue of unequal law application, encouraging people to recognise and address this form of tyranny.

Thomas Aquinas believed that a ruler who acts without legal authority is a tyrant

Thomas Aquinas's views on law, tyranny, and resistance served as a limitation on governmental powers. He believed that when those who bear the law command things that exceed the competence of their authority, the subject is free to obey or disobey.

Aquinas believed that the ruler or magistrate must occupy himself with directing the community to the good life. He must establish the welfare of the community, ensure that nothing undermines the well-being established, and continually work to extend the welfare.

Aquinas also believed that the ruler's power should be subject to the law. The ruler is bound by reason and justice, and their power arises from the need to keep them in agreement with natural law. The ruler's power is implied by their guardianship of the common good.

According to Aquinas, a ruler who acts without legal authority is acting lawlessly, which goes against the notion of a constitutional democracy. He states that when a ruler becomes a tyrant, they will be unable to promote the welfare of the community and will fail to discharge the duties of their office.

Plato and Aristotle defined a tyrant as a ruler without law, using cruel methods

The Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle defined a tyrant as a ruler without law, using cruel methods. They both developed important ideas about government and politics, including the subjects of tyranny and the rule of law.

Plato saw 'tyrannos' as a negative form of government and, due to the influence of philosophy on politics, deemed tyranny the "fourth and worst disorder of a state". He believed that tyrants lack "the very faculty that is the instrument of judgment"—reason. In Plato's view, the tyrannical man is enslaved because the best part of him (reason) is enslaved, and likewise, the tyrannical state is enslaved because it too lacks reason and order.

Plato also believed that the law can guard against tyranny, calling it an "external authority" that functions as the "ally of the whole city". In his work 'Crito', a dialogue between Socrates and his friend Crito, Plato has Socrates refuse an offer to escape his impending execution. Socrates explains that when a citizen chooses to live in a state, they "have entered into an implied contract that he will do as [...] [the laws] command him".

In his last book, 'Laws', Plato summarises his stance on the rule of law:

> Where the law is subject to some other authority and has none of its own, the collapse of the state, in my view, is not far off; but if law is the master of the government and the government is its slave, then the situation is full of promise and men enjoy all the blessings that the gods shower on a state.

Aristotle, a student of Plato, also wrote extensively on the subjects of tyranny and the rule of law. He believed that tyranny is the "very reverse of a constitution" and that "where the laws have no authority, there is no constitution". He stressed that the law ought to be supreme and that these laws must uphold just principles.

Aristotle's definition of tyranny as a form of government ruled by one individual without law, using extreme and cruel methods, may have inspired Western democratic ideas about government. It highlighted the importance of laws and rules as a safeguard against tyrannical power, the need for a government to respect the rights and well-being of its people, and the idea that power should be distributed to prevent a tyrannical concentration of power.

Tyranny is considered one of the Great Ideas of Western thought

The concept of tyranny has been a significant theme in Western political thought, evolving over time and sparking debates about the legitimacy of rule and the balance of power. Tyranny is often associated with the arbitrary, oppressive, and violent exercise of power, marking a deviation from just and virtuous leadership.

Historical Perspectives on Tyranny

The term "tyrant" in the Greco-Roman context initially referred to an individual who held absolute political power without legal restraints, distinct from a monarch bound by constitution and law. Over time, the perception of tyranny shifted, and by Roman times, the term had acquired a more negative connotation, implying a ruler motivated solely by power and personal gain. This evolution in the understanding of tyranny sparked discussions among philosophers about the moral right of citizens to overthrow a tyrant, regardless of legalities.

Tyranny and the Rule of Law

The relationship between tyranny and the rule of law is complex. While monarchs are typically expected to act within the boundaries of the law, tyranny often involves the arbitrary use of power without regard for legal constraints. Thomas Aquinas, a prominent medieval thinker, addressed the tension between law and tyranny. He argued that when those in power command actions that exceed their authority, the subjects are free to obey or disobey. Aquinas also distinguished between two principles: "quantum ad vim coactivam legis" and "quantum ad vim directivam." The former suggests that the ruler is above the law, while the latter asserts that the ruler's power should be subject to the law, aligning with the concept of the rule of law.

Tyranny and Majority Rule

The notion of tyranny is not limited to individual rulers but can also be applicable to majority rule in democratic societies. Alexis de Tocqueville, in his influential work "Democracy in America, warned of the potential for the majority to tyrannize unpopular minorities and marginal individuals. He argued that in a democracy, the majority holds significant power, and without intermediary institutions to serve as a check, there are no lasting obstacles to prevent the majority from imposing its will on others.

Tyranny and Legitimacy

At its core, tyranny raises questions about the legitimacy of power. Medieval thinkers often viewed the tyrant as the embodiment of evil rulership, contrasting them with virtuous kings who governed for the good of their people. The idea of a ruler deviating from virtue and acting solely in their self-interest is a central concern in discussions of tyranny. This concern has persisted throughout Western political thought, influencing theories of governance and shaping the understanding of just leadership.

In conclusion, tyranny is a complex concept that has evolved over time, reflecting the dynamic nature of political thought in Western societies. It serves as a cautionary tale against the abuse of power and the importance of safeguarding individual rights and liberties. By studying tyranny, we gain insights into the delicate balance between authority and freedom, shaping our understanding of just and legitimate rule.

Tyrants can be identified by their violation of international criminal law

The identification of tyrants has been a significant topic of discussion throughout history, with philosophers, political theorists, and legal scholars offering various perspectives. While the term "tyrant" has evolved over time, a modern tyrant can be objectively defined by their violation of international criminal law, such as committing crimes against humanity. This definition aligns with the ancient Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle, who characterised a tyrant as a ruler without law, employing cruel and extreme methods.

Historical Perspectives on Tyrants

The word "tyrant" has its roots in the Ancient Greek "tyrannos", referring to an absolute sovereign who came to power without constitutional right. However, during the Archaic and early Classical periods, the term had a neutral connotation. Over time, influenced by philosophers like Plato, it took on more negative associations. Plato and Aristotle defined a tyrant as someone who rules without law and uses cruel methods against their people and others.

Tyranny and International Criminal Law

A modern tyrant can be identified by their violation of international criminal law. This includes crimes against humanity, such as murder, rape, imprisonment, enforced disappearances, and torture, as outlined by the International Criminal Court (ICC). The ICC prosecutes individuals for these crimes, which are considered grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions in the context of armed conflict.

Examples of Tyrants

Throughout history, several leaders have been labelled as tyrants for their violation of international law and human rights. For instance, Abraham Lincoln believed that assassinating a leader could be morally justified when a people had endured a tyrant's rule and had exhausted all peaceful means of removal. He saw tyrannicide as a last resort to protect liberty and justice. Another example is the Roman Emperor, Domitian, who was assassinated by a steward after imposing his tyrannical rule on the Roman Empire.

Resistance to Tyranny

Resistance to tyranny has also been a significant topic of discussion. Philosophers like Cicero and John Locke have argued that citizens have a moral duty to protect the state and restore justice, even if it means taking drastic measures such as tyrannicide. Locke, in particular, posited that a tyrant acts against the interest of the people and forfeits their right to rule, justifying resistance and overthrow by the citizens.

In conclusion, tyrants can be identified by their violation of international criminal law, specifically crimes against humanity. This definition aligns with the historical perspectives of Plato and Aristotle, who viewed tyrants as rulers without law. Throughout history, resistance to tyranny has been justified by various philosophers and legal scholars, emphasising the importance of protecting the welfare of the state and its citizens.

Frequently asked questions