Why the Hell of Law Journal Proves Communism Sucks

This is an old post from my now-defunct Myspace blog. I'm going to post some of the older postings in reverse chronological order to put a little meat on the bones of this puppy.

Originally posted Wednesday, September 27, 2006.

I was a big political theory geek in undergrad. Unwilling to accept that capitalism was the way to go, I fashioned myself as a communist. Then I took Political Theory with Dr. Nancy Love. (Yes, that's really her name, and, yes, she's lovely.) Aside from the wacky notions of human nature that Karl Marx espoused, the only thing I really remember from the Commie section of the class was the tractor. If you live on a commune and share a tractor, when you're done at the end of the day, what do you do? Why, you let it sit there, of course! Why the hell fill it up with gas when the next guy to use the tractor isn't going to be you?! Whenever I see Commie hippies preaching the communal way of life, I think of my friend the tractor. But today I've discovered a better metaphor: Law Journal.

For you non-law students (read: people bright enough to avoid this living hell), Law Journal exists so that law professors can send their poorly written articles to a group of poorly trained law students in some lame attempt to fix the articles so they can be published in some journal that no one ever reads. Our journal goes through three stages of checking: the Accuracy Check, the Double Check, and the Page Proof. As a third-year law student, I supervise the second-year students up through the Page Proof, but when the damn articles fall in my lap after the Page Proof, it's my job to make sure these 100+ page monstrosities are in perfect shape. And here, my friends, is why Law Journal proves that Communism sucks big monkey balls: Because even after three checks, the damn things still land in my lap looking like a big pile of steaming dog poo. Any system of government (or way of life) that involves passing the buck is sure to falter when the chain of command reaches its weakest link.

Therefore, instead of Communism or even Representative Democracy, I propose Radical Democracy: elected representatives who stake their reputations (and lives) on successfully doing their jobs. Miss that vote in the Senate today, Mr. Santorum? I'm sorry, you'll have to be the target at target practice for the Secret Service this afternoon.