|
|
|
|
|
|
by _def
19 days ago
|
|
|
I'm having a hard time to parse this last part. Care to elaborate? > In a system with rule of law, the rules are already being followed so that stupid/unreasonable rules are reformed as they're encountered and you can't use the massive backlog of them to make everything grind to a halt while people scramble to do all at once the thing they should have been doing continuously over time. |
|
|
If you actually have rule of law then rules are enforced even if they're stupid, because that's what rule of law is -- no one is above the law. Which in turn causes stupid rules to promptly get fixed because actually enforcing them causes problems and fixing the rules is necessary to make the problems stop getting caused.
Whereas if you don't have rule of law and just ignore most of the rules then the bad rules keep accumulating until someone nefarious comes in and decides to start enforcing them, either capriciously as an autocrat or systematically as a saboteur. At which point you have a huge emergency because it's hard to instantly reform the enormous backlog of bad rules that have been accumulating while no one was paying attention to them.