How might the rise of cryptofinance change our process and conception of justice

The current justice system is based about concepts of retributive justice. Retributive justice can be defined by the maxim of let the punishment be equal to the crime. This kind of justice has led to mandatory minimum sentencing, three strikes rules, and harsh conditions for prisoners based around the idea that punishment prevents crime. These ideas formed prior to neuroscience so there was no concept of the sociopath or psychopath. These ideas also do not take into account drug abuse or the influence of drugs. This means both mental illness and drug problems are typically swept under the rug in favor of harsh punishments.

In fact the drug charge has become one of the primary charges and also doles out some of the harshest punishments so can we say under retributive justice that the punishment fits the crime? Retributive justice also allows for the concept of vigilantism, the bad guys must be punished to restore the balance of light and dark or good and evil. Concepts like good and evil once again fit into the world view of retributive justice, which has a narrowly defined majority consensus basis for right and wrong. The problem with retributive justice is it's all about punishment and does not reward anyone who does what is right.

This would mean if you do right all your life it's expected that you're just supposed to do it and there is never any incentive for doing it. There may even be indirect punishments doled out for doing things too right if people are jealous or if the people who do the consensus definition of wrong gain control of the systems and institutions of justice. This would mean it's possible to be good good for society and get punished but it's also possible to be too bad by society and get punished. It means it's easy for anyone to lose just because they deviate from the normal.

Justice favors the strong under the current system

Thrasymachus argued that justice favors the strong and he was right. If you can hire a good lawyer, or if you're from a large and powerful socially connected family, then you can set the laws to favor your own traits and situations so that justice favors you. It is for these reasons that vice crimes are a terrible thing, because vice affects everyone and while everyone has some sort of vice or moral failing in the eyes of the consensus majority, those who have the resources can protect themselves from retribution for their vices or lifestyles. Prostitution, drug use, gambling, all are considered vice offenses and it's a victim-less crime. Sex trafficking and drug abuse are not victim-less but once again there is a line drawn here where sex trafficking is something which is not consensual and drug abuse involves some form of quantifiable abuse

Social justice, people should get what they deserve?

The problem with social justice is who determines who deserves what? The reward distribution system is almost never going to be completely fair. In a zero sum game some have to lose so others can win. In the economy of a shrinking pie such as ours, someone who gains a job costs someone else a job. A machine which boosts productivity costs even more jobs. Eventually there will be no jobs, and it will be because that is what people deserve? Culture tells us what people deserve in terms of reward but also in terms of punishment. Some crimes if you ask people they will tell you that the criminal deserves to die. Does killing the criminal affect future consequences or prevent future crimes? It's unlikely that killing a serial killer or serial rapist will prevent the next serial killer or serial rapist. Also if the serial killer for instance commits suicide before he or she can be captured such as the case in Columbine then what good is the death penalty as a punishment? These forms of justice also do not take into account that if the criminal is a psychopath and in most cases of serial killers they are, all evidence currently points to psychopaths simply not having the neuron-pathways to control their impulses. Fear of death does not seem to has as much influence unless it's immediate death. Rewards also have to be immediate to shape behavior in psychopaths generally.

Consequtialist forms of justice do not necessarily rely on the punishment model. Deterrence is the goal and not punishment. If we look at our system in many cases committing a crime is the best option or most immediately rewarding option for the person committing the crime. If its a psychopath committing the crime then the chance of an immediate reward is unlikely to be passed up due to fear of risk or fear of consequences such as death. For instance if we have a psychopath who has to decide whether to sell drugs or go to college then if it's easier for that psychopath to get access to drugs than to gain access to college and if drugs bring in instant gratification, immediate rewards, they may choose to deal the drugs instead of going to college because it's both easier and its a quick buck. The psychopath by nature will chase the quick buck without thinking of the long term consequences or risks. The long road of going to college, trying to work up to a good career does not sound as good not just for the psychopath but for most people in general.

Society is still ruled primarily by money and guns

In general people with lots of money and lots of guns are the people who run society. As a result people either want lots of money or lots of guns. Also when there isn't a lot of money to be found or to earn then people will choose guns as a way to have power over their own lives. The problem is that unemployment should be expected to continue to increase because technology is advancing and making most jobs obsolete. There just isn't a need to have as many workers as there once was but at the same time this is happening we are also watching as the money supply system based around central banking is failing all around the world. This means the money which acts as the blood to keep society moving is drying up.

The money drying up, if people have no access to money then people begin to build weapons and this in my opinion is a scenario which is bad for everyone. Bitcoin is an alternative money which is immune to the problems of the central banks. A secure and stable money supply and financial system is critical to keep society running, but it also means volatility in society as the new guard rises to replace the old guard. New businesses will form with new disruptive business models which will be tested out and while some will work, some might not.

Cryptofinance will become increasingly important as the traditional forms of finance start to become obsolete. It could be said that cryptofinance could undermine traditional finance, but that is only one perspective. Another perspective is that in the medium term they will both coexist. In the long term though I think the entire finance industry is going to have to adapt to the technology and become much more high tech. Cryptofinance isn't the problem but instead is part of the solution and we should look at it objectively to determine what benefits it can have on society.

To be continued…

QR Code
QR Code cryptofinance_and_justice_part1 (generated for current page)