We can think of the rule of law and our equal treatment under it, like Hayek did, in terms of a generality norm. Decent society with others in the context of a political order will require limiting state coercion to the enforcement of general, abstract, impersonal, neutral rules that apply to all citizens equally. Rules that fit the norm will not afford special privilege or prioritize the interests of anyone over others. And no one is simply subject to another’s arbitrary will. According to Hayek, the generality of law is the most important feature distinguishing it from specific commands.
Consider this case: “Keith,” I command my neighbor. “Get your dog out of my yard.” Now I don’t, of course, rule over Keith. I don’t provide him with an arbitrary set of marching orders for his day or task him with directives out of nowhere (like “Keith: drop and give me 20 push-ups”) or establish for him a regimented pet-care routine. But in this case, I tell him that he must do this specific thing here and now. Obviously, it’s important in this case that we’re talking about my yard. Most of my other views about how Keith manages his day or his dog aren’t any of my business. In this case, though, the command is an application of a more general rule concerning private property, which always applies equally to everyone. The relevant rule suggests that whatever Keith decides to do “will have to satisfy certain requirements” or observe certain constraints, none of which hang on anything particular to myself or Keith (or his dog).
Comments
No posts