First, the law is not a balance

Fairness and justice are the balances, and they are related to bilateral affairs with related interests. Pen Fun Pavilion www.biquge.info fairness and justice are not balances, fairness and justice are the circular lines of the three sides. In layman's terms, legislators and law enforcers should consider the trilateral rights and interests of the law and the parties when designing and enforcing the law, rather than the unilateral or bilateral rights and interests of one party being autocratic or equal in the nature of the two parties. So the argument is not a balance.

The law is not a balance, and in embodying the fairness and justice of the law, the law cannot use the scale to measure the degree of damage between the victim and the perpetrator, and for the punishment of the perpetrator and the compensation for the victim, the law should stand in a three-dimensional way to judge and exercise power from the perspective of a third party, rather than standing in the center of the scale, and divide the interests equally in a two-point and one-line manner. The law is not a balance, it is impossible to inflict the victim's damage on the perpetrator's side equally, the reason is that the law is a justice organ that punishes crimes and suspends crimes, and the punishment of perpetrators is nothing more than punishment and imprisonment, for minor crimes, the law takes the principle of suspending crimes and punishing phenomena, and tries to punish the perpetrators' illegal acts, and for the perpetrators who cause serious harm, since ancient times, the law has punished the perpetrators with social responsibility in the capacity of justice, and the law punishes the perpetrators of crimes on behalf of national justice or social justice. Therefore, the perspective of the law is not the balance of the scales, but the third party, that is to say, when the law demonstrates the fairness and justice of the law, it judges crimes from an objective perspective and punishes the perpetrators of crimes.

Therefore, the law is not a balance, and it is not possible or necessary to balance the balance between the perpetrator and the victim. According to this principle, the fair and just means adopted by the law for the criminal acts of the perpetrator are the means of not punishing the offender and not punishing the offender. The law cannot use the perspective of the balance to balance the fairness of the perpetrator and the victim, while ignoring the fact that the law represents the power of the state and society, and the punishment of the offender is the responsibility and justice of the crime. In other words, the law cannot use the concept of value to balance the degree of punishment of the victim and the perpetrator, and punish the crime with the value orientation. To put it simply, the law should stand on the standpoint of the state and society for those who violate the law and commit crimes that cause serious harm to society, justly punish the crimes, and severely punish the criminal acts with precepts.

The precepts are restraints, restricting a person's personal freedom, and since the precepts are imposed, there is no point in punishing them. For a person who has lost his freedom or even his life, it is pointless to punish him. Moreover, such a law only wants to demonstrate fairness, but it loses the value of justice.

For criminal offenders who have already been punished, the law may not be used at the same time, but for the compensation of the interests of the victims, the law should assume the responsibility of the state and social obligations, and compensate the victims through the establishment of social charity funds or through the establishment of an insurance system. This is because the law also has the principle of fairness towards the offender.

For a person who has lost his freedom, he no longer produces social value, and naturally there is no social obligation, and this is the truth that the law is not a balance. Therefore, in ancient times, the casters of the East and the West used the precept without punishment, and the punishment for not taking the precept is in line with the principle of human nature.

The law is the responsibility of the state, and it is the power of the state that is exercised, and the admonition of the offender is to put an end to the crime, and the trial decision deprives a person of all rights such as political rights, social obligations, personal liberty, and personal values, and the power exercised by the law is mainly a means of restriction.

Therefore, when a person loses his freedom, there is naturally no social value, and the punishment for his interests has no value significance. This is the truth that the Fa is not a balance.

Second, law is a third-party ideology

What is the original intention of the establishment of legal powers? If the purpose of establishing a power is to protect the rights and interests of the majority, then it is first necessary to consider what kind of environment and intentions the person who violates this power is in. For example, what is the purpose of designing the right of way? In addition, in order to ensure the safety of travel, a traffic police management system was established to punish those who violated laws and regulations on the road, so as to ensure the safety of the whole people. This was the original intention of the right-of-way law. Then the question arises, the problem is that the people and vehicles walking on the road are unit individuals, and the traffic police who exercise power on the road are not unit individuals, but organized police forces, so how can the law be set up on this two-way line to reflect the principle of fairness and justice, and how to implement the law of fairness and justice?

That's what legislators have to think about first.

This is actually a matter of one, two, and three in the methodology. We set up a law to exercise two-way unilateral powers, and terminate under the law of tripartite or quadripartite or even five-party balance, so as to complete the implementation of the principle of fairness and justice of parallel law. This is the original intention of the law, but if you break this principle and strengthen the protection of unilateral rights and interests with unilateral power as the main line, then the law you set up will be authoritarian. When it comes to autocracy, there is a possibility that politically sensitive topics may be involved in China, so I ran away from this topic in a 100-meter sprint and only talked about fairness and justice.

In countries where philosophy is applied, most of the implementation of fairness and justice is done by the judiciary, and it makes perfect sense that government departments are not allowed to participate in it. Speaking of the word truth, let's analyze what the meaning of truth is. The Tao is the meaning of the passage, the road. There is no road in the world, and when there are more people walking, it becomes a road. Where there is a road, there is reason, and this principle is the scene we see intuitively, and it is the rationality of walking that does not affect each other and does not hinder each other that is inevitably produced on the road that everyone is walking, that is, the simplest and most intuitive rationality. On a road, the two sides come and go, walking the flow of people, in order to ensure the safety of pedestrians, so people will have the simplest and most intuitive principle, that is, each walks his own way, and can not hinder others from walking at will, this is the source of the truth.

Today, in order to protect the rights and interests of passers-by, the right-of-way law set up is also the same reason. Therefore, this principle is that there are bilateral lines that travel to each other on a road, which is also the principle that starts from one and goes into two. But when you set up the right-of-way law, you are no longer from one, do in two, you have a third-party supervision platform, then in this road will become the principle of starting from one, walking in two, and dividing into three. This is also the principle of the methodology of becoming one, combining two and dividing into three. That's why we created the law.

What is the law? This is the meaning of the law. Therefore, law is a third-party ideology, and law is not a dualistic structure, but an equal law of tripartite separation. To be more precise, the law is not a balance, and the law does not suppress the rights and interests of both parties, but is an organ of power that exercises fairness and justice in a position of reciprocity with a third party. The law does not balance the rights and interests of both parties, the law exercises the responsibility of the state, carries out the obligation of the state, and the law only punishes those who violate laws and regulations, so the meaning of the law is fairness and justice, not fairness and justice.

Fairness and justice contain spiritual justice, while fairness and justice are the justice of material equality. The Dharma cannot choose material equality and ignore spiritual equality. This is because the spirit of the law is a concrete reflection of the truth of the objective and just trial from the perspective of a third party, rather than an intuitive reaction that directly participates in it. To put it in layman's terms, the Fa is not a flat shoulder and two ends to pick up, but the Fa stands in the middle to provoke the parties on both sides and play a role in balancing the parties on both sides. The law cannot stand at the middle point of two points and one line, and take the golden mean. The law is not a balance, and one should not put oneself in the middle of an event, and exercise the functions and powers of the law for the purpose of balancing. Rather, it is to stand on the third party to objectively analyze the course of events, and to exercise the justice of the law objectively and impartially from the standpoint of a third party.

3. The law is the spirit

What is law? Law is the spirit and ideology. Law is a judicial concept in which ideology is greater than material conditions, and it is the idealistic spirit in which ideology dominates the material basis. If the spirit of the law is measured by material conditions, then what you get is the justice of the law determined by the quality of things, that is, what you get is justice rather than justice, but the spirit of the law is embodied in justice rather than justice.

Since its inception, the Fa has not been a product of materialism, and the Fa channel, some people have the Dao, no one has the Dao, some people have the Fa, and no one has the Fa. The Dharma comes from the self-consciousness of human beings, and it is brought by nature, and it is born out of the security needs of human beings, and it is born at will. Therefore, the Fa originates from the depths of the human soul, enters the spleen through the lungs, and the spleen and spleen are transmitted to the brain, and through the brain to the whole body, the command is formed, so the information and principles of the Dharma are very logical and reasonable concepts.

Dharma is spiritual. The people pin their security needs on the spirit of the law, and place their hopes for fairness and justice in the arms of the mother of the law, and the law should pass on the warmth of the law to every citizen and legal person under the law.

Fourth, top-level design, universal coverage

China's grassroots courts are not rational courts, and grassroots judges are not all rational judges. In recent years, grassroots courts have dealt with cases in which high-altitude objects have been thrown to death and injured passers-by, and the responsible person cannot be determined, which shows the humane thinking of China's grassroots judges. In the case that the person responsible cannot be determined, out of the humane thinking of compensating the victim, the judgment that the property of the community and the residents of the whole community jointly compensate the victim is very correct and embodies the spirit of the law. The safety of human life is more important than everything else, and everything should be people-oriented. The judgment that the property of the community and the residents of the whole community jointly compensate the victim is not only a fair and just justice for the victim, but also a punishment for all the residents of the community. However, when dealing with such cases, we still only see the spirit of the grassroots courts, feeling the stones and crossing the river, and cannot look at the standard bills designed at the top level.

Under the current system, China should implement the legal system of the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress, composed of politicians, thinkers, judges, lawyers, people's representatives, etc., to debate the key issues in society at all times, design and issue standard top-level bills in a timely manner, and cover the whole people from the top down, rather than forcing out subsequent top-level supplementary bills like a regurgitation from the bottom.

The level of civilization of a country is the most obvious criterion for the justice of the law. Because the Fa is a spiritual pillar that people can see and touch, and the common people's sense of security is pinned on the spirit of the Fa, the importance of the Fa is self-evident.

5. The religious spirit of the law

In a small county town in the southeast of Henan, there is a martyr's cemetery established for the sacrifice soldiers during the Liberation War, which should be a place to worship the heroes and the dead, but the local government has transformed this place into a park for the surrounding masses to enjoy leisure and entertainment, there are many people in and out every day, there will be a lot of square dance aunts to exercise at night, the music resounded in the sky, where is still a serious place to worship the heroes and the dead, it is a square. If this is a violation of the law in Japan, this kind of desecration of the heroic dead is already against the law. But in China, Chinese officials are not impressed, because Chinese do not believe in gods, so they do not need to take into account the feelings of gods. How terrible it is for a people not to believe in God has been seen from the behavior of officials here.

The reason why the Japanese are so reverent of the martyrs comes from the Shinto religion of the gods and the earth in Japan, and the reverence of the Japanese for the gods comes from the religious spirit of the state for the rule of law of the gods.

Since the Chinese do not believe in God, officials do not need to waste state resources to spare a large piece of good land, so why not let the masses have leisure and entertainment? This is because if you do not revere the ancestors, it is impossible to cherish the clan relatives around you, and if you do not have the clan spirit, how can the national spirit come from, and if you do not respect the ancestors, it is impossible to cherish the present people, and there is no national spirit at all, let alone the populist spirit.

Sixth, unlimited lending will shake the foundation of the country

Unrestricted lending would shake the country's foundations. The reason is very simple, when the vast majority of the people are debtors, people will instinctively inspire a regime change that is expected to be turned upside down, and such a popular will produce a herd effect, as long as there is an impact of external conditions, it is bound to scatter and flee, and unite the national spirit. So what seems to be a very ordinary thing actually contains huge hidden dangers. If all the people in a country are debtors, how far will the country be from collapse? When everyone is a debtor, who is not afraid of the creditor's debt collection? When the creditor has the creditor's claim of all, then he must be the enemy of all debtors, and who would want to put his heart and soul in such a country with the status of a creditor?

When the debtor violates the spirit of the contract on a large scale, how can the creditor exercise the creditor's power? Relying on the power of the state, then the state is the enemy of all debtors. The subprime mortgage crisis can be resolved quickly in the United States because the United States has a sound rule of law. However, if there is a subprime mortgage crisis in China, it may shake the country's foundation, which is not alarmist, because China's economic rule of law is not sound, and when dealing with the sudden large-scale violation of contracts between citizens and legal persons, the rule of law is not scientific, which may bring about a greater crisis.