The Vaunted Pursuit for Justice

In the aftermath of the highly publicized protest of the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, I was once again struck by the demand for justice.

Throughout recorded human history the notion of justice, however defined, has run a parallel course. Justice is a critical moral and political concept in Western thinking, going back to the days of Plato and Aristotle.

Early Christian theologians such as Augustine and Thomas Aquinas have grappled with its complexities as well as Enlightenment thinkers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. From the Industrial Revolution to the Nuclear Age to the Internet explosion, defining and redefining justice has been a paramount pursuit.

Justice is a multifaceted term that can be somewhat paradoxical in scope. Too often, however, justice is tossed about in our current discourse as a catchphrase denoting that morality exists exclusively with those who use it.

In the context of Brown or the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, justice is defined as a predetermined outcome that has been reached by the court of public opinion that may or may not consider the facts, especially those that run counter to the position reached.

It is not uncommon for a district attorney, when seeking the death penalty, to declare capital punishment is necessary in order for the victim's family to receive justice.

Activists, politicians, and pundits conveniently use justice as if they alone are in sole possession for what is true.

Though there is a common belief that justice used in this context is understood, it is invariably applied as a camouflage to mask arrogance and insularity.

Is justice an outcome or a process? Can there be justice if the result is not to our liking?

There is an egalitarian aspect that must be present if justice in its myriad forms is to be achieved. It was the absence of equality that served as the basis for movements such as women's suffrage and civil rights.

The comfort of the status quo is usually the leading opposition against this pursuit of justice. Bolstered by "what if" claims that seldom, if ever, come to fruition should said justice be achieved have historically been nothing more than thinly disguised fear tactics.

This has been recently witnessed in the battle for marriage equality. It what was simply a case of equal protection guaranteed by the 14th Amendment was (and is) hyperbole run amok from the status quo suggesting that marriage equality would cause plagues of locust, frogs, darkness, and death of the first born, ultimately leading to Armageddon.

The pursuit of justice reflects an imbalance of power. Those seeking justice, who understandably desire to balance the scales, can become susceptible to arrogance that blinds them to human dignity as much as the forces responsible for the power imbalance, hence the paradoxical aspect.

This reveals the greatness of Martin Luther King whose pursuit for justice made room for the human dignity of the infamous such as Bull Connor, George Wallace, Ross Barnett and others.

However defined, there can be no justice that is void of human dignity, no matter how noble the pursuit.

Human dignity is commonly understood in moral, ethical, legal, and political capacities indicating that individuals possess an innate right to be valued and receive ethical treatment. It is an extension of the Enlightenment concept of inalienable rights.

It lies at the foundation of the America's mission statement also known as the Declaration of Independence. But America's history is pregnant with acts egregiously inconsistent with its ideals.

Thus furthering the paradoxical aspect of justice. Perfect justice would be a state of harmony where there are no conflicts of interest.

Obviously the aforementioned is an impossibility. Therefore, "relative justice" is the best one can hope for. Relative justice by definition negates the possibility of justice being a utopian pursuit.

While there can be no definitive definition of justice, its pursuits lie close to the concurring opinion of Justice Potter Stewart to describe the threshold test for obscenity, "I know it when I see it."