Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

"In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread."

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Anatole_France



sort by: page size:

"The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread."

( https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Anatole_France )


https://nissan.com/

"In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread." - Anatole France (https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Anatole_France)


La majestueuse égalité des lois, qui interdit au riche comme au pauvre de coucher sous les ponts, de mendier dans les rues et de voler du pain.

In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Anatole_France


"In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread."

- Anatole France, Le Lys Rouge [The Red Lily] (1894), ch. 7


> the power to work for less

“The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.”

- Anatole France


> The homeless, penniless child should never steal the loaf of bread when all other, apparent, options are exhausted.

'The law, in its majestic equality, forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal their bread.' - Anatole France


> In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread.

> The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.

at least we're still a little step above this:

"In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread." -- Anatole France


> The laws don't affect the rich and the poor in the same way.

To paraphrase an excellent line: The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges and steal bread.


>The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.

One should realize that politics can be used to cement long terms societal stability, and not just make one rich as fast as possible.


Maybe you'll like this one better:

It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their selfish purposes. Distinctions in society will always exist under every just government. Equality of talents, of education, or of wealth can not be produced by human institutions. In the full enjoyment of the gifts of Heaven and the fruits of superior industry, economy, and virtue, every man is equally entitled to protection by law; but when the laws undertake to add to these natural and just advantages artificial distinctions, to grant titles, gratuities, and exclusive privileges, to make the rich richer and the potent more powerful, the humble members of society — the farmers, mechanics, and laborers — who have neither the time nor the means of securing like favors to themselves, have a right to complain of the injustice of their government. There are no necessary evils in government. Its evils exist only in its abuses. If it would confine itself to equal protection, and, as Heaven does its rains, shower its favors alike on the high and the low, the rich and the poor, it would be an unqualified blessing. pretty damn relevant today. (rent seeking, crony capitalism, lobbyists writing the bills)


> Law abiding citizens are the suckers it seems everywhere.

True! When laws are made that benefit a few and harm everyone else, you'd be a sucker to follow them.

> It's easy to be nobel and generous when you are not the one being taken advantage of.

It's easy to abide by the law when you are the one the law benefits.

> Regardless of who benefits from Lawlessness, it always ends up destroying the society

Maybe it's not that surprising that those excluded from housing by society are okay with destroying society that actively harms them.


> Nature is unfair.

And some people really want it to stay that way.

I read somewhere that we were all born with the same rights. It's still a joke, a few centuries after someone had understood that:

Money equals power. Power equals rights (in our society, until now).


>the currently advantaged part of society does not feel like sharing much.

There is no country on Earth that has unfettered access, and unconditional citizenship - rich or poor.


> People would rather be miserably poor and ruled by a ruling class that they identify with than have higher living standards and be ruled by an out group.

There's truth to that no doubt. But I would say many also prefer to be ruled by those who give them preferential treatment over others. But I have faith that many people prefer to be ruled by a democratic system of equal justice.


> Humans will always crave to have more than each other ad will steal, loot, defraud, do anything to get there.

Yes and currently society has many many ways for the privileged to get even more than others than they already have, in ways that are legally accepted even if they’re morally reprehensible. And as long as we don’t change that and make the playing field more even, I don’t think judging petty theft so harshly makes any sense at all.


>It follows that using wealth as a measure [for deserving] is definitely a bad choice.

It's not a choice. Would you rather it be wealth or violence? As civilizations mature, the power that happens to be encapsulated in a tribal (read gang) leader's threat of physical violence and banishment transmogrifies into debt obligations once a strong civil law foundation is in place.

>By what measure do you or I deserve more than poor people? Who decides who deserves what? Let me know and we'll start lobbying next Monday ;)

“Don't you understand that it's a question of power, and money means power. It's as simple as that.”

- John Deuss


We ought to be angry sometimes. Maybe you'll like this one better:

It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their selfish purposes. Distinctions in society will always exist under every just government. Equality of talents, of education, or of wealth can not be produced by human institutions. In the full enjoyment of the gifts of Heaven and the fruits of superior industry, economy, and virtue, every man is equally entitled to protection by law; but when the laws undertake to add to these natural and just advantages artificial distinctions, to grant titles, gratuities, and exclusive privileges, to make the rich richer and the potent more powerful, the humble members of society — the farmers, mechanics, and laborers — who have neither the time nor the means of securing like favors to themselves, have a right to complain of the injustice of their government. There are no necessary evils in government. Its evils exist only in its abuses. If it would confine itself to equal protection, and, as Heaven does its rains, shower its favors alike on the high and the low, the rich and the poor, it would be an unqualified blessing.

pretty damn relevant today. (rent seeking, crony capitalism, lobbyists writing the bills)

next

Legal | privacy