I don't think anyone would dispute that the Travellers were in the wrong in undertaking the development without seeking permission (presumably, knowing they wouldn't get it) and thus trying to impose a fait accompli.
But the question I suppose is whether it is then 'right' to address that wrong by evicting them. Arguably, this is wrong both morally (making people homeless without providing satisfactory alternatives) and practically (expense of public funds without actually gaining anything worthwhile from it). If one accepts those arguments, then two wrongs can't make a right, according to the traditional arithmetic.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-09-14 08:15 pm (UTC)But the question I suppose is whether it is then 'right' to address that wrong by evicting them. Arguably, this is wrong both morally (making people homeless without providing satisfactory alternatives) and practically (expense of public funds without actually gaining anything worthwhile from it). If one accepts those arguments, then two wrongs can't make a right, according to the traditional arithmetic.