smartcybers786@gmail.com 
#Exceptions #rule #Political #Economy
Human history is full of formal promises of equality, rights and rule of law. However, living reality has generally been the opposite: an uneven application of exceptions, privileges and rules is a permanent model. Circles, codes and liberal ideas are repeatedly involved in strength concentration and inequality. What is considered universal has always continued a ruling class within it. Thus, the rule of law has emerged as a desire as a permanent political reality. History shows that exceptions are a great structure of low irregularities and human rule.
Apart from positions and civilizations, a familiar pattern emerges. The general principles – whether it be declared as the king’s justice, religious law or constitutional rule – is declared to be bound. At the same time, a privileged class, whether the rich, the pastor, the colonial organizers, the party’s elite or military leaders, have been given security vaccinations, discretionary power and legal exemption. Over time, these exceptions have gone to the institution: Special courts, tax exemptions, patronage networks and emergency measures that were meant to be interim but remained for a long time. The rule of law often acts as a means of organizing and preventing those under the elite instead. Historical examples are many: strengthening that confirmed the king’s justice but forgave the royal abuse. Colonial governments, which implemented a set of laws for colonies and the other a set of laws for colonialism. National security beliefs that suspend constitutional guarantees. And tax flaws that protect corporations, while ordinary citizens face severe implementation. This frequent difference between the promise of equality and its process has ensured that the exception becomes a structural principle rather than irregularities.
Many ideological traditions help us understand why exceptions eliminate such a permanent principle. Social agreement thinkers such as Hobbs, Lok and Rosso saw the state as a cure for nature. Hubs famously described pre -political life as “loneliness, poor, dirty, brutal and short” and argued for the authority of Levithan. Nevertheless, while individuals agree with the authority to secure peace, there is no guarantee that the authority ties its agents. Rousseau’s voice says “man is born free, and wherever he is in chains” takes over this contradiction: social agreements that claim globalization often make the elite’s privilege. Here the law reduces a universal shield and a tool for electoral implementation.
Marx accelerated the point, “The history of all current society so far is the history of class struggle.” For this, the law was never neutral: it was formed by the ruling class. The universal rule of equality – appears as a property law, agreement or constitutional rights, is practically bent to maintain the dominance of the economic elite. Tax breaks, preferential agreements and property protection for wealthy are not defects in the system, but have features how legal shapes adopt the needs of class power. In this reading, exceptions are not a temporary departure, but are the methodology of class domination.
Michelle Focalt added another layer of analysis by showing how power and knowledge are connected to each other. Power not only suppresses. It also develops types of knowledge, governments of truth, and institutional methods that normalize exceptions as technical needs. Emergency announcements, the classification of populations in “normal” and “deviations”, and security, justify all examples of how the exception is made as rational, even welfare, rather than political privilege. Where the power is present, the focal observed, there is resistance, but it also has a constitution of a permanent reorganization, which is lawful, normal or unusual.
Max Weber and Perry Bordendo deepened this diagnosis from a social point of view. Weber is prominent among the traditional, charming and legal rational authority. In practice, the elites often mix them to maintain discretion and immunity. Even in modern bureaucrats who claim immoral rule, the discretionary force allows the exception to flourish. The Bordeaux showed that social and cultural capitalist privileged classes enable the institutions to visit in different ways. Equal rules produce unequal consequences, as people with resources can manipulate them in their favor. Its concept of “symbolic violence” illuminates how inequality changes the disguise of goodness, which legalize the exception as a natural benefit.
Legal realists and critical legal scholars have increased this criticism by declaring the concept of law mechanically neutral. He said the law was uncertain. The results depend on judges’ social positions, political forces and institutional interests. If the law cannot be separated from power, then exceptions – electoral enforcement, exceptional clauses and special prejudices – structural, not accidental, in legal systems.
This mutual interference of power and law also reflects the ideological work of equality itself. Circles, announcements and rights have provided moral and symbolic language that maintains legal status. They stabilize the social system by promising equality, even when such promises are rarely offered. Two mechanisms are central. First of all, symbolic globalization ensures that “all men are equal”, such as phrases mask real disparity, agreeing to citizens to accept the system whose benefits are distributed unequally. Second, the legal insulation has embedded the exceptions in the constitution through emergency clauses, immunity for office holders and special courts. Orwell summarizes the tension in the animal’s farm: “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” The equations that appear in the statements are often classified in substances. The resilience of exceptions is not merely explained by accident but by systematic forces. The elite have strong material privileges for the protection of privileges such as taxation, property reservations and immunity from prosecution. Institutions give birth to these privileges unless they become the usual rule characteristics. Temporary emergency options, which Carl Schmidt have described as an independent decision on the exception, often become a permanent fixture. The bureaucratic and expert dialogue develops these privileges as a technical requirement, and masks their political content. Meanwhile, the rhetoric of rights and the myths of the merits reinforced the resistance by promising the move above, even where structural obstacles remain. In this way, the exceptions do not last. They are re -ready and legalized.
Literary and philosophical voices echo this fact. Russo’s claim that “man is born free, and exposes the tension between freedom and social subordinate wherever he is in chains”. The vision of the hubs about the brutal state of nature justifies the authority, but the option itself becomes a source of new inequality. Marx’s insistence on class struggle indicates the structural structure of privilege. Rumors about equality and cutting in animal farms have highlighted the hypocrisy of formal equality during significant ratings. The strength of the focal insights reminds us that many types of exceptions are also designed to look natural and necessary. These thinkers help us understand why the law declared rule is so frequently weakened.
However, it is important to note the ability. Progress has been made: In many places, slavery has been abolished, voting rights have been extended, courts have occasionally imposed rights against powerful and bureaucratic institutions. These benefits show that the law can sometimes act as a privilege examination. In addition, not all systems re -reproduce the exceptions. Some polys have developed strong security arrangements – independent judiciary, free press, often civil society – which has to tighten the exception. Yet even in strong systems, war, economic inequality and concentrated power repeatedly produce new exceptions.
If there is a structural possibility of exceptions, then treatment should also be structural. It is insufficient to declare universal principles only. Institutions have to restrict discretion, reduce special safety vaccines, strengthen transparency and ensure that emergency options end instead. The scrutiny and balance should be spread through free courts and a dynamic civil society. Want to reform cultural and educational systems. Most importantly, the re -division politics must focus on the material bases of privilege, which permanently produce exceptions. Without dealing with wealth and involvement in social capital, legal equality will be a corruption.
Subsequently, human history reveals an anxious dance between global law rhetoric and special privileges. To say that the exception is that the principle is not to resign themselves with fatalities, but to recognize structural trends that disrupt equality. As long as citizens and institutions constantly resist the normalization of privileges, the promise of equality will often be a discount of only a rhetoric rather than living reality. Orle’s warning is true: Without alert, “some animals” will always be “more equal to others.”
The author is a professor at the Faculty of Liberal Arts at the Beacon House National University in Lahore.
