"[Gramsci]...observed that social order is maintained by a system of beliefs which are accepted as 'common sense' and part of the natural order- even by those who are actually subordinated to it. In other words, these ideas are treaded as eternal and necessary whereas they really reflect only the transitory, arbitrary interests of the dominant elite" (Wacks, 95).
Gramsci's (marxist) theory makes the most sense (for the sake of argument) with law regulating or deregulating economic policy, and the judicial review thereof. For example, while the Supreme Court struck down a good deal of progressive, worker friendly legislation in the 1920's, the New Deal court stepped aside during the presidency of FDR. While there are clearly many different actors and variables which contribute to the situation in which the Supreme Court exercises judicial review, its worth considering that the will of the power players in our country (big business in the 20s, and conversely, the enormous popularity of FDR) have an affect on the decisions of the courts.
The relationship economics and law is an interesting one, consider the recent efforts in many states to allow for the cultivation of marijuana for medicinal uses. Many unemployed citizens can access the license to grow and find the proper channels to distribute their product. While it is not enough to support a family, it is an easy way to supplement your income. I would be surprised if many peoples legal opinions on marijuana in somewhere like Michigan due to the potentially beneficial economic impact it has on the state's economic situation.
ReplyDelete