In the Absolute Austro-Libertarian system, the concept of justice is to revert the situation to its original status as best as possible. It has nothing to do with either vengeance, punishment or rehabilitation, but it has something to do with settlement. Justice should be universal and well understood. Justice in the Austro Libertarian system is the only way forward from where we currently are.
We have seen the four possibilities that exist in our article In-Justice in the Democratic System. We will get back to them later on. But first, we need to describe our way of justice.
THE MASTER CONTRACT
We need to go back to basics. The Master Contract reads:
5. A person or organization of any kind infringing any MC rule waives all its MC contracted rights with the infringed party with the exception of 2a).
6. A person or organization of any kind infringing any MC rule is responsible with its property to the full extent of the infringement or, as specified in a contract with the infringed party.
These two points is all that’s needed to have a true, logic and rationale justice system. We will show you in the next sections how these two conditions operate in the real world.
THE TWO PILLARS
The Absolute Austro-Libertarian system is based on property. Not because we are greedy bastards, but as we explained many times before, property is something that everybody understands intuitively. In addition, property can be assigned a monetary value that is more or less objective.
Therefore, we present the two pillars of the Absolute Austro-Libertarian way of Justice:
- Easy to understand
- Objective to calculate
And that’s it. It is all that’s required.
A BALANCED APPROACH
From our point of view any interaction that a person may have with other people’s properties, must be done according to voluntary contracts. If you interact with other people’s property without a contract, you are in breach of the Master Contract and responsible to the full extent of the damage (of any kind) with your own property.
This makes sense because if we did something to somebody’s property, we changed the original conditions in which that property existed. The goal of our justice system is to revert the state of the property to its original conditions. We can only do this with property. We cannot do this through subjective, moral, ethical or psychological means.
For example, if Gerardo ruins Hui’s garden with a soccer ball, the goal of the justice system is to repair Hui’s garden to the state it was before. In order for this to happen, Gerardo needs to either fix it himself (his work is his property) or pay for a gardener (his money is his property) or reach some sort of agreement with Hui where some property will change hands from Gerardo to Hui. What Gerardo cannot do is to apologize or pray or go to jail for a few days or do community service or go to a psychologist for re-education. None of these activities get Hui back his garden. Therefore, none of these activities are just.
This approach is balanced because we don’t pretend to know Gerardo’s motives and we could not care less. What we do care about is the preservation of property. In this sense, our justice is balanced because it attempts to repair what was damaged and nothing more.
This is a very balanced approach and it is fair to everybody. There are no middle man, there is no governed to determine stupid sentences or conditions or paroles or things of that nature and you don’t have to pay for the maintenance of jails through taxes.
This would seem like a light burden to bear for infringers, alas it is not so. This point will become apparent in the following sections.
CRIMINAL VS. CIVIL INFRIGMENTS
In the current in-justice system there are two well separated but ill-defined venues: the criminal justice system and the civil one.
The main difference between and the other is simply what the law says it is. There is no real, solid rational why one “crime” should be a “crime” and the other one a “liability”. The government decides this on the basis of gut feeling and the direction the wind is blowing that day.
Consider the following:
- Killing is a “crime”, yet in Nazi Germany killing sub-humans was not only a crime but an obligation.
- Currently in most countries, mixed color marriages are a blessing. However, if you were a white person in South Africa you were forbidden from marrying a black person.
- Up to recent years, being homosexual was a crime in many countries.
- Up until recently, you could scream pretty much anything you wanted in an airport. Today, just try to say “weapon” or “gun” or “fire” or “bomb” and you will be tossed into jail for a very long time.
Those are just few examples of how subjective “criminal” laws are.
Not so in the Absolute Austro-Libertarian system. In our system since everything is a property that belongs to somebody or at least it is seen as a property for operational reasons; we only need to deal with actual, monetary values. We don’t have to deal with idiosyncrasies, ethics, morals, religions or whether or not the Prime Minister is in bad mood today and will sign an executive order declaring the red color illegal.
In our system there is no such thing as a “criminal” justice system nor “civil” justice system. Justice is one and the same. It is transparent and obvious.
INFRINGING MASTER CONTRACT RULES
What do we mean by infringing Master Contract rules?
We mean that if you interact with somebody’s property without a voluntary contract, you are infringing Master Contract rules.
What does interaction mean? Does it mean:
- Using a tool? Yes
- Breaking a window? Yes
- Walking on somebody’s property? Yes
- Stepping on somebody’s toe? Yes
- Breaking somebody’s let? Yes
- Killing somebody? Yes
- Creating noise? Yes
- Polluting somebody’s air? Yes
- Stabbing somebody? Yes
- Killing somebody? Yes
Pretty much anything that you can do with a property, if you do it without a voluntary contract, you are in breach of the Master Contract and therefore in debt with the property owner.
To make matters even worse, you are responsible for all expenses incurred by the owner in the process of seeking reparations. For example:
- Time spent contacting or finding you.
- Time spent negotiating with you.
- Time spent waiting for you to repair the damage.
- Money lost because the property cannot be used.
- Frustration because the property cannot be enjoyed.
And so on.
This means that if you breach the Master Contract you are responsible for all the consequences of your breach. There is no escape to it. Once you add all the expenses you will realize that messing with other people’s property is literally very expensive (in money). This fact becomes the best deterrent: self-interest. There is no need for other laws, rules or regulations.
Before we look at how we get our value back, we need to look at the simplest solution. What happens if I don’t want to seek reparations? Well, that’s my decision.
As the infringer is in debt with me personally, and his debt is now my property, and my property rights are absolute, I can choose to forgive it. I have the absolute right to do so.
This would be the most common outcome of minor infringements. Somebody walks over your lawn or steps on your foot, or parks too close to your garage, or it is too noisy, or some of their garbage spills in front of your door, and so forth. These are everyday occurrences that in the eye of the infringed people are not worth pursuing or doing anything about. This is nothing but a reflection of current reality. That is how the world works today.
However, there is a crucial difference. In the Absolute Austro-Libertarian way, it is our right. We decide to seek reparations or not.
In the current world, there are laws, rules and regulations of which we have no power of decision. Somebody parks in front of our garage door. We don’t have a car. The municipality tickets this person’s car. We don’t have any saying in it. We cannot do anything about it, even if we wanted to. We don’t have any rights, even though it is our garage door and we couldn’t care less if somebody parks in front of it or not. That’s the current system. It offers you no choice, even when dealing with your property.
Every justice system has an enforcement branch of some sort. They are necessary because people act in their own self-interest. If they are “criminals” their self-interest dictate that they don’t want to be caught.
Therefore a system must be devised to seek them out and bring them to justice. The problem with this approach is that such an organization is expensive and this expense is unrelated to the level of service of efficiency they exhibit. Having a police organization is not cheap.
Alas, this is not the Absolute Austro-Libertarian way. In our way there are no governmental organizations simply because governments do not exist. Does this means that “crime” pays? Certainly not.
As we have seen in the previous section, infringing the Master Contract is expensive. Where there is profit to be made, there is a company providing a service. Therefore, in our way of life, there will be companies that will ensure we get reparations, for a price. This price will, most likely, be added to the total the infringer already owes us. Making infringing a bad idea.
Is this farfetched? Not at all. Today we have plenty of Private Investigators. Under an Absolute Austro-Libertarian way they will continue to provide their service plus some extended options. Nothing unusual here.
If the infringement was cheap (somebody stole our wallet), the company will be cheap. If the infringement was expensive (somebody stole our car), the company will be more expensive.
Therefore, the effort in seeking out infringers and making them pay (literally), is proportional to the level of infringement. Furthermore, we, the people, do not pay through taxes for this service, but the infringers do with their property, which is fair and balanced.
Note: please see the Glossary if you are unfamiliar with certain words.