Why the law must be respectable

[unixronin]

The instrument by which [government] must act are either the AUTHORITY of the laws or FORCE.  If the first be destroyed, the last must be substituted; and where this becomes the ordinary instrument of government there is an end to liberty!

Alexander Hamilton, Tully letters, No. 3, 1794; emphasis apparently his.

Allow me to expand a little upon what Hamilton is saying here:  The government of the United States was envisaged to be one of law, binding both upon the citizenry and upon the government.  In order for this to work, the law must be respected, by all parties involved, which in turn means that the law must be respectable.  When the government makes law which it then turns around and openly flouts, it shows that it has no respect for the law; or when it makes law which is either clearly abusive, ridiculous, or impracticable to follow, then the law is no longer worthy of respect.  Either destroys the respectability of the body of the law, and when the law loses its respectability, it loses its authority.

When the law loses its respectability, then the citizenry will cease to respect both it, and the government.  When the law loses its authority, then the citizenry will cease to obey it, and the government.  And when that happens, the only way the government can continue to govern is by force.

Of coyrse, when the government has so debased the body of law that it cannot govern by it, and does not respect the law itself in any case, the right and proper thing for the citizenry to do at that point is to remove their government and install a new one.

(And in case you were wondering, no, this does not mean going down to the voting booth full of righteous anger at all those other crooks, and then voting your incumbent back in because he's a good guy who brings home the pork.  That's another phrase for "is part of the problem".)