Crime or Virtue?

Edwin Benson has already been cited on Panera case and misconstruing what is wrong, with Communism, here he is back again:

How Leftists Try to Turn Crime into Virtue
By Edwin Benson on Return to Order
https://www.returntoorder.org/2020/05/how-leftists-try-to-turn-crime-into-virtue/

Approvingly, he cited:

Joseph Vincent, Assistant Special Agent in Charge of Homeland Security Investigations, San Jose, reacted to the conviction. “Those who corrupt the integrity of our nation’s legal immigration system must understand there are serious consequences for those actions. We will continue to work with our counterparts to investigate those who manipulate and exploit that system for their own personal financial gain.”

Integrity of our nation's legal immigration system?

How many legal systems can a state set up where people acting on their own can be outlawed for not following the right procedure? How much has the state a right to control?

These people object to Fascism, a k a Corporatism, and other even non-Marxist versions of Syndicalism. They object (John Horvath II himself) against minimum wages. I'd not advocate a flat equal minimum wage for Hawaii and Alaska and all climates and societies in between and on East Coast too, but I'd advocate minima wages per city or county, and per state. And a law stating any double legislation on minima wages needs to work out for a higher wage.

I'd call that the integrity of a nation's peace on "the work force market". But no, TFP is against that. They think it's Marxist, even if Pope Leo XIII recommened it.

But when it comes to harrassing poor people (as refugees blocked from applying for Green cards on the right spot in the right time often are), there has to be a legal system and its integrity cannot be disrupted.

Edwin Benson gives three reasons for approving:

First, no one, not even an attorney, should be telling others how to break the law. A real sense of order demands that freedom of speech be limited when urging others to violate just laws. If a person believes that a law should be changed, that person is free to advocate such a change. Indeed, an unjust law might make it a duty to demand change.

To St. Thomas Aquinas, an unjust law is not a law. Demanding change is not all there is in opposing ubjust laws justly.

Second, a new form of judicial activism was clipped back in this court case. Ever since the days of Chief Justice Earl Warren (1953-1969), federal courts on all levels have reached far beyond their authority. This is a minor victory, but it creates hope that some sense of judicial restraint may be creeping back into the courts. The unanimity of the Supreme Court, in this case, is a hopeful sign.

I'm on two sides on this one. On the one hand, fraud is not virtuous per se. And Evelyn did defraud her clients. She charged money for applications which she knew would not work. One reason why poor people do not always trust authorities is, this behaviour is not restricted to only private actors. Officials can play that game too.

On the other hand, the court of appeal* did consider equity and benevolence to the clients as being involved - looking beyond this case and into what it may be a precedent for.

Third, despite occasional exceptions, the federal courts have opened the door to many disordered interpretations of the law. Pornography, contraception, procured abortion, same-sex “marriage” and now “transsexual” rights have all been aided by courts compliant to leftist demands. A legal “right” to openly advocate violations of the law would have been a valuable tool for the left. Fortunately, it has been taken out of their hands.

Left wing unacceptable overbearance has other forms than just liberties, there are also bans. Like that on Creationism in schools and that on promoting specifically a Catholic school. And the time may come soon, when a right to advocate violations of bad laws may be valuable to Christians. In more than one place.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Ist Saturday of Pentecost Novena
23.V.2020

* Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge A. Wallace Tashima.

PS, linking back to earlier comments on Benson:

Are Some Conservatives Trying to Tell me "Socialism Doesn't Work"?
https://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2019/03/are-some-conservatives-trying-to-tell.html

I came across Edwin Benson's lampooning of Panera Cares again
https://nov9blogg9.blogspot.com/2019/03/i-came-across-edwin-bensons-lampooning.html

In brief : acting voluntarily according "from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs" is not condemned as Communism, but making a bureaucracy to ensure everyone (except perhaps those running it) are forced to so act is condemned as the fault of Communism.

Here is another entry, for another man, who told me in a debate (maskerading as "Joakim von Anka" = Swedish for Uncle Scrooge) that "rule breakers ..." well, look it up:

Social Credit Canada Does NOT Mean Social Credit Score Red China
https://assortedretorts.blogspot.com/2020/02/social-credit-canada-does-not-mean.html

After the link to the video, it is under "I", "debate".

Some people are willing to demonise me for slightly promoting Québecquois Social Credit, and they would be about the same ones who want a kind of social credit score of the Chinese type themselves./HGL