(I shall admit upfront, I am a lawyer (of sorts - there is more than one type of legal representative)).
I understand the mentality, and when directed at lawyers (predominately US based) who incite actions themselves (e.g. by creating class actions, only to take the lions share of the settlement) then it is perhaps fairly applied.
However, in respect of lawyers who only do what they are asked to do by a client, on the client's initiative (like myself), then it is not (so) fairly applied. In this case, we are just doing what we are good at and someone is willing to pay for.
I am sure many people will happily do something they are able to do (by knowledge and legally), and have been paid to do, regardless of what it ends up 'costing' others. For example, I personally think it is a dreadful state of affairs that grown men can be paid millions of pounds per year to kick a football about a pitch, especially since that situation has largely been driven by the likes of Sky/BT offering stupid money for exclusive rights, and then holding fans to ransom to pay it off afterwards. However, that's the football business for you.
A more mundane example - a builder is unlikely to not do an extension that has been given planning permission just because the neighbor has complained to him that he doesn't like the design, or it was a bad decision by the planning department. That is between the client and neighbor, not his problem. The builder just wants to do what he is good/able to do, and earn some money.
Also remember, generally speaking (but some people do like to defend themselves), that for every "bad" lawyer that is litigating for the 'baddy' (MSFT here), there is a "good" lawyer defending the "goody", and some even do this for free (called pro bono), so they can't all be bad and henc eonly worthy of wall alignment.
Furthermore, if there were no lawyers, then how would disagreements or judgments be settled? Society depends on these things.
I suspect that if, come the revolution, the lawyers are first up against the wall, then the revolution will only bring in more chaos, which will probably lead to a further revolution when the people realize they cannot/do not want to live in a post apocalyptic type world where it is simply the biggest/best armed person who rules, and in the next revolution, perhaps it will be those who carried out the first revolution that are against the wall...
That's enough, it almost party time.
Happy New Year.