To Right a Wrong

Addressed to the common reader as well as specialists in law, this book ties the already recognized framework for constitutional construction, that of political theory, together with human psychology.



It presents a model that systemizes the forces that act upon us, both individually and en masse; it explains why some will embrace a system of principled law while others will prefer a system of arbitrary law; and it explores the qualitative difference between the worldview of these two groups of people, the reasoning that goes with either position, and its implications for society.



As shown, we are dealing with two opposing paradigms competing for hegemony. The tension between the two has been formative to the evolution of society and only those who reason from the perspective of principled law can adequately decipher the Constitution. Not only were the founders themselves exponents of this type of law, but it is the only defense against injustice and arbitrary government. This being so, the author goes into detail discussing the differences between the two systems of law, the superiority of principled law, and the extent to which we have become a system of arbitrary law.



Framing the evolution of American law from a legal, political, and psychological perspective, the result is a framework that not only adds more depth, coherence, stability, integrity, and credibility to the discipline of constitutional interpretation-one that provides us with a sense of direction historically and normatively speaking-but a framework that holds great promise for social engineering purposes and, in this sense, completes the founders' mission.