A toe in the water
Being a toe too far.
In the centre of Diktatiaville is a square and in the centre of the square is a fountain and in the fountain people like to cool off when it’s hot, thus lowering the tone of this charming fictional town square.
The mayor, being a little bit Jack Straw, proposes that bathing in the fountain should be banned; first-time offenders should do 100 hours of community service; and a second offence should result in a twelve month stretch in the Big House. It seems a little harsh, but the law is passed and apart from a few first-time offenders, no one ever breaks this law twice.
As the book asks, it may be rough, but is it justice?
Well, it is justice, but it hardly seems just. This could be described as gerontocratic law. That is, the old men govern society because of their experience, but are completely out of touch with contemporary society so that they pass laws which are only relevant to them and their needs, prejudices and paranoias. But however you see this, a law against bathing in a public fountain seems a little petty and the punishment for it disproportionate to the act. The book says that it’s meant to be a deterrent against people splashing around in the fountain, but they may as well suspend an atomic bomb above it which will go off if anyone enters the water.
The discussion at the back of the book considers the difference between an action which doesn’t directly affect other people (e.g. not using a seatbelt) and an action that does (e.g. crap Hollywood… robbery with violence). Thus bathing in a public fountain doesn’t hurt anyone, but does cause the elderly to react hysterically. (Well, they have nothing else to do.)
The mayor, being a little bit Jack Straw, proposes that bathing in the fountain should be banned; first-time offenders should do 100 hours of community service; and a second offence should result in a twelve month stretch in the Big House. It seems a little harsh, but the law is passed and apart from a few first-time offenders, no one ever breaks this law twice.
As the book asks, it may be rough, but is it justice?
Well, it is justice, but it hardly seems just. This could be described as gerontocratic law. That is, the old men govern society because of their experience, but are completely out of touch with contemporary society so that they pass laws which are only relevant to them and their needs, prejudices and paranoias. But however you see this, a law against bathing in a public fountain seems a little petty and the punishment for it disproportionate to the act. The book says that it’s meant to be a deterrent against people splashing around in the fountain, but they may as well suspend an atomic bomb above it which will go off if anyone enters the water.
The discussion at the back of the book considers the difference between an action which doesn’t directly affect other people (e.g. not using a seatbelt) and an action that does (e.g. crap Hollywood… robbery with violence). Thus bathing in a public fountain doesn’t hurt anyone, but does cause the elderly to react hysterically. (Well, they have nothing else to do.)
Justice has been served today and Dilemma 94 is being served tomorrow when Mr Crofter buys a Scottish island.
Comments