justice or power?

Today's top BBC story is Saddam Hussain's trial. It seems pretty clear that he is/was a nasty piece of work, ordered many deaths and should never have had any power. But the trial can hardly claim to be fair, since his mortal enemies hold all the cards. If the situation was reversed, Saddam could hold the same carefully managed trial for us. Only two days ago, 70 Iraqis were killed by western troops, and eye witnesses claim all the people were innocent. Even if we include all the million people Saddam killed since coming to power in 1979 , this is a lower unlawful death rate than the carnage since 2003. When one side holds all the power, a trial cannot be fair.

What's the alternative? (Do you really have to ask?) With land rent, the problem could not arise in the first place. If a society has land rent, thieves can never gain power. And the poor always have a basic income. Tyrants rely on genuine injustice to give them popular support - all tyrants arise amid great injustice. Take away the injustice and you take away their support. Give the ordinary people a land rent based income, and you give them the economic security to solve their own political problems.

Given that Iraq did not have land rent, and Saddam is in jail, would I stop the trial? No, but I would make it a very low key event. Saddam's system was based on theft backed by violence. Modern democracies are based on theft backed by violence. Sure, Saddam's had MORE theft and MORE violence, but let's focus on the real issues. Get rid of theft at the foundation of society, instead of worrying about who is the bigger thief.