Reweaving Justice

Now that Restorative Justice has raised her Gaian ecological purpose, to restore multiculturing peace in polyphonic polypathic Turquoise Eden, how do you continue to justify a win/lose Retributive Justice evolutionary philosophy of law and moral order as contributing to healthy win/win regeneratively revolutionary democracy? Asked the ecosystemic Judge of UnitingNations jurisdiction. Restorative Justice was never intended to be effective where either victims or predators are unwilling, often incapable, of re-engaging in cooperative interdependent win/win dialogue, egalitarian discernment in-between Trust and MisTrust and hostile DisTrust and restorative ReTrust. So you argue win/win regenerative assumptions of natural/spiritual creatures are not safely, and not realistically, accessible for all the healing dreams and purposes endemic to our Gaian muse of Justice? An insufficiency of experience with healthy democratic peace; yes. And, how will continuing to primally rely on win/lose retribution, where victims and a healthy society are presumed to Win by punishing criminals and Loser scofflaws, lead us toward this noble, and globally multicultural, goal of achieving healthy democratic peace for all Earth's regenerative creatures? Retributive Justice is the State's weapon to protect the Common Good from further injustice, a deterring threat; not a tool or medicine toward an actively remediating peace, domestic or international, private or public resonant health. How do you respond to peace therapeutic win/win possibilities of multiculturally mediated dialogue to bring together victim compassion with wrongdoer remorse, without hyperactive threat of criminalization; As compared to current Retributive Justice outcomes, case loads, imprisoned and exploited populations of marginalized misfits, disproportionately poor and dark-skinned? Traditional patriarchal systems do not over-invest in democratic health or rights of our predative and victimized, traumatized feminized marginalized raped and pillaged citizens, as these are not well-established in win/win cooperative investments. I'm not sure arguing for further patriarchal competitive win/lose capital-investments helps your justice through win/lose punishment cause. You invite the Court to question whether anyone is capable of sufficient Trust toward resiliently democratic peace, internal as external, to actively communicate egalitarian restorative healthy democratic choice-making, Facing toward compassion, facilitating win/win communication disciplines, expanding ego-recentering non-violence therapeutically mediating ecosystemic compassion. Well, actually I invite the Court to recognize you have already remade and restored your bicameral balancing mindbody, so it doesn't really matter how I would prefer to debate toward some ultimately punishing win/lose diminishing dissonant prejudicial patriarchal and anthropocentric leftbrain dominant outspoken ex cathedra judiciously judicial outcome.