On the other hand, when this is observed that a fact fully is not explained by a physical law, not subsiste more as law, but only as moment of the knowledge that if puts in new way, capable to enclose the not foreseen and conflicting fact. In the ethical world, of us if each new fact it involved the destruction of the rule there! Sanction is all consequence that if adds, intentionally, to a norm, aiming at to its obligator fulfilment. Sanction, therefore, is only that wanted, desired consequence, ece of fish with the specific end to tutor a rule. When the measure if coats with an expression of physical force, has properly what coercion is called. The coercion, of that as much says the jurists is, thus, a species of sanction, that is, the sanction of physical order. According to Aristotle, the term justice denotes, at the same time, legality and equality. Thus, just it is as much that one that fulfills to the law (justice in strict direction) how much that one that carries through the equality (justice in universal direction). Justice implies, also, in alteridade.
A time that justice is equivalent the equality, and that equality is a relationary concept (that is, differently of the freedom, the equality always mentions one another one to it, as we can evidence of the sensible lack of in the phrase ‘ ‘ Joo is igual’ ‘ if compared with the phrase ‘ ‘ Joo is livre’ ‘), it is impossible, according to Aristotle and Santo Toms de Aquino to practise an injustice against itself exactly. But in metafrico direction we could speak in injustice against itself, but, in this in case that, the term injustice can more adequately be substituted by one another vice of the character.
The proportionate conditions for the age of the Empire, as well as the emergency of the multitude as agent politician capable to not only produce corporeal property, but also knowledge, information, ideas and affection that allow the expansion of the common one and strengthen the trend after-modern that it sends to an organization of the resistance in net, allows in to glimpse them the possibility of a future where it invigorates a global democracy. Added collective intelligence to the affection becomes viable the project of the multitude, conceived for Hardt and Negri as a project of the love. The new movements that not only demand the global democracy value the singularity of each one as organizador basic they claim as it as a process of autotransformao, hibridizao and miscegenation. The multiplicity of the multitude is not only one question of being different, but also of devir different. Devir different of what you are! These singularidades act in common, therefore, form a new race, that is, a subjectivity politically co-ordinated that the multitude produces.
The primordial decision taking for the multitude is in the reality the decision to create a new race, or, better a new humanity. When the love is conceived politically, therefore, this creation of a new humanity is the supreme act of love. (HARDT; NEGRI, 2005, p.444) the desire of a world where the equality and the freedom prevail, aspects norteadores of a global democracy that the construction of a life favors in common and that today it seems possible of being materialize, appears as the base what Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri they call ‘ ‘ project of multido’ ‘. it is important to always have in mind that one another world is possible, a better and more democratic world, and to promote our desire of this world. The multitude is a symbol of this desire.