The Benevolence of Our Leaders

[Zoid]

Rules…

Huh!

Who are they made for?

"The benefit of all!"

… or so they would have you believe…

Is it over-cynical of me to believe otherwise? That rules, laws, company policies, are (generally speaking) created for the benefit of those who create them? And that any subsidiary benefits are secondary and only exist in order to pacify the masses into believing in the benevolence of their leaders? For the ultimate benefit… of course… of the leaders?

By "leaders," I mean bosses, employers, legal administrations, politicians, prime ministers, presidents, kings, queens, etc.

Is it or is it not our moral obligation, as intelligent free-thinking citizens of the world, to not blindly follow all our rules and our laws, presuming that they are fair and for the benefit of all, but rather to question, even to actively disobey, any rules or laws which we feel to be unfair, unjust or based on invalid or ill-conceived presumptions?

[Flux]

I think that who is benefited the rules and regulations of a given organization depends entirely on which which organization your speaking of. Different organizations have different sizes, goals, governing structures, and financial support, all of which are factors in determining who the rules of the organizations benefit. Given the astonishing number of organizations with rules in the world, from nations to nunnery's, your bound to have plentiful examples of both corrupt systems geared toward benefiting a select group of people and of efficient organisations led by well meaning people that implement rules for the benafit of all involved.

As for questioning rules, practicality rears it's ugly head. An individual cannot question every rule. This is due simply to the constraints of time--most deal on a regular basis, as members or indirectally, with more organizations with more rules than you could possibly form an opinion on even if the rules were unchanging (which they arn't), and you had several lifetimes to study them.

However, though faced with an inability to question every rule, an individual should be allowed to question any rule--nothing should be completely barred from discussion. This amounts to simple prioritizing, and deciding which rules need changing most, and whether those rules are in your city, state, company, nation, etc. By choosing which battles to fight, you concentrate an effort on making a real difference in several specific areas rather than simply complaining about problems in many very large areas. And it really is possible for one person to make a difference in a wide number of areas--just not all of them.

[scameter]

Rules are made to govern. They are meant for both the public and the government officials, as well as the military, to attempt to scare people into not doing things that could harm others, thus giving also a sense of security to those who don't break the law/rules, in aknowledgement of the evil people can do.

[Zoid]

There are, of course, exceptions, and rules are generally made to govern, but given that rules are (obviously) made by "the rule-makers"... wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that, generally speaking, they are made for the benefit of "the rule-makers"? Even given the most optimistic assumption that "the rule-makers" consider it beneficial (to themselves primarily) for the "masses" ("beneficiaries" of the rules: workers, constituents, etc) to be happy, be nice to each other, etc...

[sonrisa]

rules are made to be broken :D

[scameter]

As I've said before in the case of governments, and this essentially applies to anyone making rules, a wise ruler or ruling body will make rules that the people want, at least partially, and will be willing to follow and benefit from, because happy people approving of the rule-maker benefits them much more than making some extreme set of laws that only help them and hurt everyone else. For instance, paying taxes is a rule enforced by the government, and though people dislike it, and it apparently only helps the government, people are willing to do it because the government uses it, at least partially, for roads, bridges, the military, etc. So, though taxes also pay the salaries of the politicians, it also helps the people, making both happy. Bad governments only make the rulers happy, like monarchies.

[Smurf]

hehe nice topic

Well Rationalist theorists would dismantle the "rules are made for those in charge" ideas from the start. Which I would tend to agree, to a degree.
The problem is that rules are a double-edged sword. Differing factors come into play here also. Whether or not oen should obey them on principle, or if one is waiting to be forced to be obeyed. Also whether you should obey them if they are useful/not-useful to you etc.

I would argue that yes, there are a lot of people out there who instigate rules in order to control and prosper from a given situation. But, there remains the capacity to create regulations in order to "get the best" out of people.

I would accept the bare realistic facts, but retain a sense of optimism and hope that those who strive to be "in charge" do so with an appropriate degree of selfessness.

[rehilaration]

Rules…

Huh!

Who are they made for?

"The benefit of all!"


I think rules are made, in a very basic sense, to separate man from the animals. Without the rules that mankind has set, whether by a ruling body or otherwise, we would be living by jungle rules. Granted, there are a great many who still do live for themselves, and only themselves, but the rest of us attempt to live more 'civilized' lives. In our society, we tend to punish those who live by jungle rules. Murder? Stealing? Etc? Those are all things that we have decided are wrong, and we condemn those who would act outside of our boundaries.

In another way, I suppose we use these rules to justify jungle behavior as well. We justify war because we feel that it is in the best interest of the community. It is a dirty business, but we are told that 'someone has to do it.' And we agree with them, because we are sure that once our enemies are gone, we will be able to survive peacefully. Which never happens.

So there we go. Rules are created to separate us from our base, primal natures, but are also used to justify the use of them as well. It's rather twisted.