Record Detail

This comment on Cheesman’s Opposing the Rule of Law explores five
elements of the work that lead me to describe it as exemplary. These are its interdisciplinary
fluency and reach, spanning high theory and ground-level ethnography; its
specific argument about the independent significance of law and order as not just the
absence of the rule of law but a rival conception altogether; its specific contribution to
the understanding of Myanmar political and legal realities; its distinctive, linguistically
alert, mode of analysis; and its moral underlay. The comment ends with three
questions about Cheesman’s argument: one having to do with whether law and order is
better described as a rival conception to the rule of law, rather than its asymmetrical
opposite, the second suggesting there might be dynamic interconnections between the
two, and the third asking whether the terms in which Cheesman cashes out his contrast
might owe more to anatomical mainstream definitions, which he and I suspect, than
they do to the sort of ethnography he does so well.