The Dialectics of the Legal Status of a Person and Individual Freedom

Abstract

Stratification is one of the foundations of class society. In the daily routine, this is noticeable when the head of the enterprise counts on a better and more plentiful grocery basket than an ordinary employee. The legal position of a wealthy and educated person is also diverse. One most often drives a car, concludes dozens of transactions, and attends sports clubs; he or she is often registered as an entrepreneur or serves in law enforcement agencies. Minors and mentally disordered people cannot boast of the legal personality of an adult mentally healthy citizen. The attention of the legislator has been turned away from low-status groups throughout history. Not required to be held accountable by law, their representatives cultivated a culture of doubt, absenteeism, and illegalism in their midst. The individual freedom of such a person is very wide, but, forced into the backyard of the economic system and prestigious practices, he rarely finds usage for his own talents. Senior officers, politicians, and businesspeople easily purchase goods for the home and take their children to the best schools. In retribution, they have to constantly endure the attention of society, play a role that is not completely characteristic of the inner world, not give in to a spontaneous impulse, and give up the pursuit of happiness without worries. The existential task of jurisprudence is to combine the best of two lifestyles. It means to soften the dialectical opposition of a solid social status and unlimited freedom using procedural tricks and the sprawling apparatus of doctrine and dogma. That’s why the semantic center of our science is located where citizens manage to put together an objectively valuable human capital with maintaining a low or outcast legal status. Such people have something to lose. They are more willing to turn to a lawyer with a request for help and legalization.