|
Societies are governed by a set of rules known as law. Laws are necessary to keep order in society and as deterrence mechanism to prevent individuals from seeking self gain at the sole expense of others. They stem from a more basic need as individuals to follow proper conduct in order to make group environments practical and mutually beneficial.
Laws today have evolved into very complex, defined and technical rules that people are expected to obey. Their intentions are to promote the fair treatment of perpetrators under a similar set of circumstances. While they seek to have clear cut definitions and categories, for example a specific charge like theft under $5000, in reality these clear definitions are not effective. Circumstances in each individual case may alter the context of a crime into another perspective. More importantly, much of the governance and legal systems employed today are ridiculously technical, bureaucratic and a simple pain to navigate through. The entire process is a burden on taxpayer’s time and money.
I am not particularly well-read, in that I would not be quoting well-known works of literature freely in my writing. Nor do I catch many of the literary references that others may use. I do enjoy reading, but who has the time these days. However, I have heard that Franz Kafka’s works speak strongly about the impersonability and fears of a faceless bureaucracy. I read that cockroach short story, which left an impression on me. In that story, a person randomly turned into an insect one day and slowly died in the company of his family, helpless and shunned for his unsightly form.
In this blog, my usage of law would refer to specific rules a society is expected to follow. It is not limited only to the cases a lawyer may typically be associated with, but also encompasses such government policies as tax laws, business filings, corporation structures, zoning designations, property rights, utilities distributions, and whatever else is associated with government responsibility. The sheer paperwork and hurdles that our modern governments require is a huge waste of human manpower and resources. Unfortunately, it would be extremely difficult and perhaps impossible to live in a modern society without many of these ordinances in place to protect our status and rights.
One thing I really hate is people who get off on criticizing the government (excessively). It is stupidly easy to point out things the government may be doing wrong. There is simply no possible way for the government to introduce policies that everyone likes. Each person seeks to protect their own interests which often conflict with those of another. Normal everyday people like to complain about “dumb, heartless politicians”. How utterly pointless and unhelpful that is. It’s just like being the annoying ass in a project pointing out all the flaws and offering no constructive comments. When they do think they have brilliant ideas, they are grossly oversimplified and ignore the greater considerations that a proper governing body must balance.
So governments are not ruined by incapable politicians, but instead the sheer inflexibility of the system they are trying to run. Look at George Bush. Almost every time you hear his name mentioned in more liberal environments, you can expect to hear some joke or criticism. Anyone who even dares to defend him is immediately cast off and disregarded. The problem is that so many of these people begin to truly believe they could have done a better job in his role. “Just don’t be stupid” someone might say, to rounds of laughter and applause. Really, if you were so much better, why didn’t you take the job yourself? There is no way to be universally adored as the President of the United States. What irritates me is the bandwagoners who point and laugh, who can not be bothered to come up with real constructive criticism.
Back to the laws. On the highest levels, a national constitution may outline the basic moral values that a jurisdiction can hold. As one filters down the levels of authority, the laws get more precise and define more clearly what one is allowed and not allowed to do. At the municipal level it dictates how many metres a yellow 5000 kg car can be parked from a hospital at 5:47 am on Tuesdays. Surely there must be a line drawn to limit the impracticality of overdefined stipulations and their corresponding punishments.
I haven’t even gotten to the point in the title yet, but I don’t think I should write too long in one go. To be continued.
 
|
have you ever even played starcraft?
|
|
|
On March 21 2009 08:14 Shiverfish wrote:
Look at George Bush. Almost every time you hear his name mentioned in more liberal environments, you can expect to hear some joke or criticism. Anyone who even dares to defend him is immediately cast off and disregarded. The problem is that so many of these people begin to truly believe they could have done a better job in his role. “Just don’t be stupid” someone might say, to rounds of laughter and applause. Really, if you were so much better, why didn’t you take the job yourself? There is no way to be universally adored as the President of the United States. What irritates me is the bandwagoners who point and laugh, who can not be bothered to come up with real constructive criticism.
"A better job in his shoes" ?
A better job in his shoes would have been to not go to war at all. Do you actually believe that the wars in the middle east are a good thing and are making America safer?
|
One thing I really hate is people who get off on criticizing the government (excessively). It is stupidly easy to point out things the government may be doing wrong. There is simply no possible way for the government to introduce policies that everyone likes. Each person seeks to protect their own interests which often conflict with those of another. Normal everyday people like to complain about “dumb, heartless politicians”. How utterly pointless and unhelpful that is. It’s just like being the annoying ass in a project pointing out all the flaws and offering no constructive comments. When they do think they have brilliant ideas, they are grossly oversimplified and ignore the greater considerations that a proper governing body must balance.
So governments are not ruined by incapable politicians, but instead the sheer inflexibility of the system they are trying to run. Look at George Bush. Almost every time you hear his name mentioned in more liberal environments, you can expect to hear some joke or criticism. Anyone who even dares to defend him is immediately cast off and disregarded. The problem is that so many of these people begin to truly believe they could have done a better job in his role. “Just don’t be stupid” someone might say, to rounds of laughter and applause. Really, if you were so much better, why didn’t you take the job yourself? There is no way to be universally adored as the President of the United States. What irritates me is the bandwagoners who point and laugh, who can not be bothered to come up with real constructive criticism.
You know, I really agree with you here. Governments take so much flak from people who are completely unqualified to judge them. Sure, everyone has a right to complain and stand up when their government isn't protecting their interests, but so many people act like God Himself appointed them as the arbiter of good governing.
As for the basic point of your blog; yeah, theres certainly a risk of congestion with an overabundance of nitpicking laws. Philosophers through the ages have always tried to sift out the basic 'moral law' of humanity, but they just can't agree on it. You say you don't have time to read, but it really helps to round out your own outlooks. Try reading from Locke, Hobbes and Rousseau; a lot of modern Western philosophy on the basic laws of humanity derives from them.
|
On March 21 2009 08:14 Shiverfish wrote:
One thing I really hate is people who get off on criticizing the government (excessively). It is stupidly easy to point out things the government may be doing wrong. There is simply no possible way for the government to introduce policies that everyone likes. Each person seeks to protect their own interests which often conflict with those of another. Normal everyday people like to complain about “dumb, heartless politicians”. How utterly pointless and unhelpful that is. It’s just like being the annoying ass in a project pointing out all the flaws and offering no constructive comments. When they do think they have brilliant ideas, they are grossly oversimplified and ignore the greater considerations that a proper governing body must balance.
yes i hate this too. y dont u actually go do something about it insted of complaining. hypocrits....
i wonder how politicians feel when they are called heartless...
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
